20052116 Ver 1_Complete File_20051123

I
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P. O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890 /`
IN REPLY REFER TO October 12, 2006 ?D?J //w
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. 200620218
Caleb Creek Properties, LLC
342 N. Elm Street Suite 6
Greensboro, North Carolina 27401
0 J e 200 m.
'}`)
Dear Sir:
Reference is made to the application of December 21, 2005, submitted on your behalf by
Mr. Chris Huysman of Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants, Inc., for individual
Department of the Army (DA) permit authorization to impact approximately 6903 linear feet of
stream channels, 5.75 acres of wetlands, and 2.165 acres of open waters of the jurisdictional
waters of Abbotts Creek associated with the development of a new residential community
(Caleb's Creek Subdivision) that includes construction of roads, sewer lines, a school, and
maintenance / rehabilitation of an existing dam. The 939-acre proposed project site is located on
both sides of Teague Road (SR 2630), approximately five miles south of Kernersville, in Forsyth
County, North Carolina. The site is adjacent to Abbotts Creek including several unnamed
tributaries of the Yadkin River and includes approximately 16 acres of jurisdictional wetlands
adjacent to these jurisdictional stream channels in the Yadkin River Basin (8-Digit Cataloging
I
Unit 03040103).
By letters dated March 10, 2006, we notified you that we had received written comments
responding to the public notice for your project from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS),
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (WRC) requesting additional information about your project. We also sent you a
letter dated March 10, 2006, requesting additional information. In general the requests asked you
to provide information showing that your proposed work is the least environmentally damaging,
practicable alternative that could met your project's purpose and need. Specifically, the letters
asked you to provide a more detailed site plan that includes the limits of clearing and grading,
details of proposed roads, buildings, utilities, lot fill and other amenities including proposed
ponds associated with the development. To date, you have not responded to these requests.
Without the requested information we cannot continue the processing of your application.
Accordingly, your Department of the Army (DA) permit application has been retired.
T
If you wish to continue to pursue a DA permit, you must first respond to the referenced
letters addressing all the identified comments in each letter and provide the requested
information. With the requested information, you will also need to re-submit your application
for a DA permit for your proposed project.
If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please contact me at my Raleigh
Regulatory Field Office address or at my telephone number [phone], extension 25.
Sincerely,
5..
J hn Thomas
Project Manager, Raleigh Regulatory
Field Office
Copies Furnished:
Mr. Chris Huysman
Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants, Inc.
115 Atwood Street, Suite 407
Sparta, North Carolina 28675
Mr. Ronald J. Mikulak, Chief
Wetland Regulatory Section
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960
Mr. Brian P. Cole, Field Supervisor
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Mr. Ron Linville
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
3855 Idlewild Road
Kernersville, NC 27284
2
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Wetland/401 Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, 'North Carolina 27699-1650
3
\NA
f
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Ms. Debbie Joyce
Caleb Creek Properties, LLC
342 N. Elm Street, Suite 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
Subject Property: Caleb's Creek Subdivision
Abbots Creek [030707, 12-119-(1), WSIH]
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL
Dear Ms. Joyce:
June 9, 2006
DWQ # 05-2116
Forsyth County
On November 23, 2005, you requested a 401 Water Quality Certification from the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) for your project. We wrote to you on January 26, 2006 discussing concerns that'we
have regarding the design of the project and stating that it would be placed on hold for three weeks.
giving you time to address DWQ's concerns. As of today, DWQ has not received a response to this
request. Therefore, your file is hereby considered withdrawn and will not be reviewed until DWQ's
earlier concerns are addressed. Once you have collected sufficient information to have a complete
application (please see our January 26, 2006 letter for the missing information), you will need to
reapply for DWQ approval. This includes submitting a complete application package with the
appropriate fee.
i
Please be aware that you have no authorization under Section 401 of the Clear Water Act for this
activity and any work done within waters of the state would be a violation of North Carolina General
Statuses and Administrative Code. Please call Mr. Ian McMillan at 919-715-4631 if you have any
questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
t /r"
Cyndi Karoly, Supervisor
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
cc: Daryl Lamb, Winston-Salem DWQ Regional Office
Raleigh Corps of Engineers
Central Files
File Copy
Chris Huysman, WNRC, Post Office Box 224, Newton, NC 28658
Filename: S:\2006 Correspondence\05-2116 Caleb Creek Propeties (Forsyth) NOW.doc
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
Ncn` Carolina
lVah rally
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
o s -- Q- k 1 L0
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center
?c?rne 61 Forsyth Street, S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 - 8960
February 7, 2006
Colonel John E. Pulliam, Jr.
District Engineer 0 r= ?(=
Ll ? ?
ATTN: Mr. John Thomas LS LE 11
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers FEB 1 3 2006
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615 UENR - WATER (QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
SUBJECT: Caleb Creek Properties, LLC Public Notice
Action l): 200620218,
Dear Colonel Pulliam: -
This letter.is in reference to the application by Caleb Creek Properties, LLC described in
the' above referenced Public Notice (PN) dated December 21, 2005. The applicant is proposing
to develop a residential community that includes roads, sewer lines, a school, golf course and
maintenance and rehabilitation of an old dam: Impacts associated with this proposal will be
approximately 6,903 linear feet of stream channels, 5.75 acres of wetlands and 2.165 acres of
open water. The proposed mitigation consists of 5,102 linear feet of stream restoration, 7.1 acres
of wetland restoration, 4.2 acres of wetland enhancement and 2 acres of open water with 0.5 .
acres of littoral shelf along the pond edges. We have the following comments for the proposed
project.
The project, as proposed, will have considerable impacts to onsite aquatic resources. The
PN contains no information as to an alternatives analysis or any planning measures to avoid
and/or minimize project impacts to aquatic resources to demonstrate compliance with the Clean
Water Act's (CWA) 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines). With the information provided in the
PN, we are not able to evaluate if the proposed project is the least environmentally damaging
practicable alternative. The PN also states the project proposes 12 road crossings of onsite
streams. We recommend that the applicant be required to demonstrate that efforts have been
taken to evaluate alternatives to avoid/minimize impacts to aquatic resources, including streams,
wetlands and open waters. We recommend measures be implemented to reduce impacts to
streams from the road crossings to include, the use of spanning structures, bottomless culverts,
project redesign, etc. It is also not clear if the flooded stream footage from the creation of the
proposed irrigation pond was included in the project impacts. If not, this impact should be added
2
to the impacts and be included in the mitigation requirement. We also recommend that
`alternatives to reduce wetland fill impacts, such as project reconfiguration, be considered.
The applicant is proposing to mitigate for the proposed stream impacts at a 1:1 ratio, and
the wetland impacts at a 2:1 ratio. The proposed stream mitigation consists of 5,102 linear feet
of stream restoration on the existing golf course area. The proposed wetland restoration is 7.1
j acres of previously drained onsite wetlands and 4.2 acres of wetland enhancement. Proposed
open water impacts will be mitigated with the creation of a 2 acre irrigation pond and an
additional 0.5 acres of littoral zones along the pond edges. Although the PN does not contain
enough information to make specific mitigation recommendations, we do have the following
general comments on the mitigation information presented in the PN document.
First, the stream compensation ratio should be determined based on the quality of the
streams being impacted with 1:1 for poor quality, 2:1 for good quality and 3:1 for excellent
quality streams.' There is no information concerning the quality of streams being impacted. We
recommend the proposed, ratio of 1:1 only be used if the streams being impacted are of poor
quality (per the North Carolina Stream Mitigation Guidelines). Even using the proposed ratio of
1:1, the proposed 5,102 linear feet is insufficient to mitigate for the project impacts of 6,903
linear feet. From the impact table in the PN, it appears this difference results from the fact the
applicant is apparently not proposing to mitigate for road impacts to intermittent streams and
sewer cut impacts.
Although it is not clear from the PN, it appears the applicant is also proposing to preserve
additional stream buffers on the project site to provide for additional mitigation according to the
requirements specified in the Division of Water Quality's Randleman Lake Water Supply
Watershed Protection Rule. If this is the case, the applicant should also be informed that any
stream mitigation requires 50 feet of protected buffer and is not divided into "allowed activity
zones" as in the Zone 1 and 2 specified in the Randleman Lake buffer rules.
Stream mitigation projects on golf courses are frequently problematic for several reasons.
If they are located in a play-over area, the golf course management usually will want them to be
kept at a fairly low height and to be relatively clear of underbrush. Golf course streams also
usually receive fairly high levels of golf course maintenance chemicals (herbicides, pesticides
and fertilizers) in runoff from the golf course and stream mitigation would need to also contain
some type of storm water treatment system such as grassed swales to filter stormwater before
entering waters being used for mitigation credit. A final comment on the proposed stream
mitigation is on the proposal to reestablish dimension, pattern and profile of the streams. As the
applicant is aware, the requirement to receive "restoration" mitigation credit is to provide the
reestablishment of dimension, pattern and profile and anything short of this will likely be
enhancement rather than restoration. We have not seen any mitigation plans, so do not know if
the streams mitigation plans will actually qualify for "restoration" credits. We are a bit skeptical
as to whether the golf course will allow the reestablishment of pattern in a golf course setting as
this will take more land out of play. Another issue discussed in the stream mitigation guidelines
which may or may not pertain to the propose project mitigation, is that a project should not be
over-designed to get more credit (i.e., not reestablish dimension, pattern and profile if something
`less is needed in a particular situation).
A final comment on the stream mitigation concerns the impacts summarized in the
impact table contained in the PN. From this table, it appears the applicant is not proposing to
mitigate for impacts to intermittent streams. As stated in the North Carolina Stream Mitigation
Guidelines, mitigation should be provided for impacts to both perennial and intermittent streams.
We also have concerns with the use of the created irrigation pond as mitigation for the
loss of open waters, especially if this in an on-line pond. We are concerned the two acres of
j open water will likely serve as a treatment area for stormwater runoff and, as such, would not be
appropriate as mitigation credit unless it is off-line and has adequate vegetative protection to
filter stormwater before it enters the pond.
We were unable to evaluate the project's stormwater and flood water control measures
that will be incorporated into the site plans from the information presented in the PN. We
believe this is a very important aspect of the project, especially in this rapidly developing area
and one that should be adequately addressed before a permit decision is determined. We are also
aware this is a concern of many of the citizens in the area. We support the use of off-line
stormwater management measures, including grassed swales and bioretention areas. We also
recommend flood control measures, such as floodplain culverts at road crossings.
We do not believe we have enough project information to be able to make specific
project recommendations and, therefore, believe the proposed project is not approvable at this
time. EPA appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project and we welcome the
opportunity to review any additional information the applicant submits concerning avoidance
and minimization, mitigation plans and stormwater management. If you have any questions
regarding these comments, please contact Becky Fox at [phone] or fox.rebecca@
epa.gov.
S
Ronald J( Mikglak, Chief
Wetlands'Reg latorv Section
cc: USFWS, Asheville
NCDWQ, Raleigh
NCDWQ, Winston Salem
NCWRC, Kernersville
4
`cc List:
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
NC Division of Water Quality
1650 Mail Service Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Mr. Daryl Lamb
NC Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street -
Winston Salem, North Carolina 27107
Mr. Brian Cole
US Fish and Wildlife Service
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-1082
Mr. Ron Linville
Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
3855 Idlewild Road
Kernersville, NC 27284
WCF

9 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Thomas, Permit Coordinator
Raleigh Office. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: February 6, 2006
SUBJECT: Action ID: 20062021$, Caleb's Creek Properties, LLC, Abbotts Creek and Tributaries Thereof
(WS-III), Forsyth County
The applicant is requesting through the permitting and certification process a letter of concurrence from the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) to obtain a 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(COE) and a 401 Certification from the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ). The NCWRC has reviewed
information provided by the applicant, and field biologists on our staff are familiar with habitat values of the project
area. These comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466
et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d). These
comments are being provided subsequent to pre-arranged site visits conducted on January 25 and February 2, 2006.
The proposed project is to extend urban development approximately three (3) miles south of the Beeson Crossroad
community. The project covers 939 acres on both sides of Teaque Road (SR2630) roughly five (5) miles south of
Kernersville proper. Abbotts Creek is classified by DWQ as a water supply (WS-IR). The site is indicated to
contain approximately sixteen (16) acres of wetlands and twenty-two (22) acres of ponds in the Yadkin River Basin
Catalogue Unit 03040103). Land use in the proposed development is primarily forest, agriculture, a golf course
with a few residences. The area will be changed from very low density to higher density because of public sewerage
installed by the Winston-Salem Utilities Commission in cooperation with the Town of Kernersville. The Caleb's
Creek pro ject will include redevelopment of the golf course, a residential community and school,
As currently proposed, it appears that the project will require piping of 2193 linear feet of streams for roads. Road
construction is indicated to impact 1.14 acres of open water and 0.76 acres of wetlands. Sewer crossings will impact
344 linear feet of stream and 0.042 acres of wetlands. Golf facility impacts are planned for 0.53 acres of wetlands
and 1,193 linear feet of streams. The creation of recreational fields will eliminate 0.201 acres of isolated wetlands.
Pond and dam rehabilitation will impact 1.047 acres of wetlands and 0.257 acres of open waters. Elimination of an
"attractive nuisance' will impact 0.768 acres of pond and 733 linear feet of stream. Further impacts are requested
for 0.991 acres of individual lot fill. Overall, the application indicates impacts to 6,903 linear feet of streams, 5.75
acres of wetlands, and 2.165 acres of open waters. The project area is generally undeveloped except for an existing
golf course and this development will cause cumulative and secondary impacts to this development area and to
ancillary lands in the community. It is expected that large forested habitats and aquatic habitats will be substantially
diminished due direct and indirect (cumulative and secondary) urbanization impacts.
vision of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail SE
Telephone: [phone] • Fag:
ice Center • Kai,
[phone]
NC 27699-1721
i) S -a.11 6
-Page 2 „ February 6, 2006
' Caleb Creek Subdivision, Abbons Creek
Onsite mitigation is proposed. Restoration of stream pattern, profile and dimension are proposed for 51021inear feet
of unnamed tributaries on. the golf course. Streams are proposed to be preserved with conservation easements and
50-foot buffers that are believed to be two-tiered (30' undisturbed and 20' vegetated). Wetland restoration is
proposed for approximately 7.1 acres of previously drained wetlands. Hydrological wetland enhancement of 4.2
acres is expected as is the creation of 2 acres of open water plus 0.5 acres of littoral zones.
Previous communications by the local utility department and the Town during environmental reviews acknowledged
anticipated impacts to headwaters, habitat, stormwater regimes and flooding in the water supply watershed. Those
communications indicated the following enumerated goals: 1) to preserve wildlife habitat and forested areas to the
maximum extent practicable, 2) to protect intermittent and perennial streams, 3) to control stormwater, 4) to protect
regulated floodplains, and 5) to coordinate these efforts with other local authorities having jurisdiction.
The Abbotts Creek drainage of Forsyth County is habitat that supports game species such as deer, rabbit, squirrels,
woodducks, wild turkey, quail, dove and other wildlife species, including gay and red foxes, bobcats, hawks, owls,
and 'neotropical birds. Fish known for this area of Abbotts Creek are the Eastern Mosquitofish (oGa m Bass
i holbroakh), Rosyside Dace (Clinostomus funduloides), Creek Chub (Sematilus atromaculatus), Largemouth
(Micropterus salmoides), Bluehead Chub (Nocomis leptocephalus), Redbreast Sunfish (Lepomis aurltus), Green
Sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus), Fantail Darter (Etheostoma }labellare), Bluegill (Lepomis macrochkws), and the
Redlip Shiner (Notropis chiliticus). The Carolina darter, Etheostoma collis (NCSC, FSC) is known for the Yadkin
Glyptemys muhlenbergii
drainage south of the area in Davidson County. Historical findings of the Bog turtle,
(NCT, FT S/A) are indicated for the southern, eastern and northern portions of Forsyth County. The fish species
aquatic habitat values are thinly good despite some -
found in the area appear to indicate that water quality and agricultural impacts. These values are probably related to the amount of forests present and a lack of
imperviousness.
the city-county utility commission and private
Cooperative public-private ventures by the Town of Kernersville,
sector developers have precipitated urban growth in this undeveloped area. According to a recent article in the
Winston-Salem Journal (David Dalton, January 29, 2006), a 2004 study by the Rand Corporation rated the Triad as
the second most sprawled area in the Nation. Development in the watershed will directly and indirectly impact
habitats that support the species indicated above. Although the overall conceptual site plan is fairly well done, site
specific details are needed in order to provide a review of proposed impacts and their mitigation. Cumulative and
Secondary Impacts (CSI) are not sufficiently discussed in the submittal and mitigative measures that maintain
wildlife, aquatic habitats and hydrographic conditions do not appear to be sufficient to prevent avoidable habitat
destruction or losses. In order to reduce wildlife loses and wildlife habitat disturbance and impacts, we recommend
that project proponents visit http //Nv%N % nc« ildlife or lot;07 WildlifeSUeciesCo»/pn70 impacts. udf to evaluate
and consider protective measures that mimic and/or preserve existing hydrographic. geomorphic. physical and
chemical characteristics within the water supply watershed and that protect existing wildlife habitat values to the
extent possible.
Based on the information provided by the applicant and our knowledge of the project area, we offer the following
non-prioritized recommendations for planning purposes:
1. Instead of extensive use of culverts, the project should maximize the use of bridges. The area is
known locally for significant flooding. Storm and flood events will be exacerbated without substantial
stormwater management within newly developed headwater areas and from the loss of vegetated
forests and uplands.
2. Where culverts are permitted, culverts 48 inches diameter or larger should be buried a foot into the
streambed. Culverts less than 48 inches diameter should be buried to a depth equal to or greater than
20% their size to allow for aquatic life passage. These measurements must be based on natural
thalweg depths. Where multiple barrel culverts are permitted, a base flow barrel must be provided as
indicted above. Stormwater conveyance barrels must be placed on the active floodplaiun bench
elevation to receive and convey stormwater. These elevated barrels must be connected to the active
floodplain benches in a manner to maintain a continuous base flow channel with natural channel
dimensions and provide terrestrial wildlife passage.
February 6, 2006
s Caleb Creek Subdivision, Abbotts Creek -Page 3 -
3. No floodplain fill should be permitted along perennial streams or wetlands. To the maximum
extent possible, floodplains should be maintained as natural undisturbed areas to preserve stormwater
storage, protect stream integrity and offset habitat losses. Please refer to federal Executive Order
11988 for additional guidance concerning regulated streams.
4. Utility lines should be placed along the edged of flac depfom stream of next t activities itfhe any a are
space
practicable. This practice should provide amp
forthcoming.
5. A comprehensive stormwater management p plan ion.. Imperviousness preserve 0%thwithout
conditions to protect area streams from degradation.
stormwater management negatively impacts aquatic environments. Pre and post development runoff
and recharge conditions should be retained to the maximum extent practicable.
Development manual (EPA
outlined by the US Environmental Protection Agency in their appropriate. Such measures can significantly
Document # 841-B-00-002 and 841-B-00-003) may be reduce environmental impacts. These measures should include, but dinot be limited to, scharges, minimizin grid
naturalized stormwater ponds or wetlands, avoidance of curb and gutter d pervious
building and road widths as well as the provision of rain gardens, grass swells, bio-retention, pavement, and the protection of naturally forested drainage ways and floodplains. No stormwater or
other direct discharges, including golf course drainages, should bypass stream and wetland buffers or
bio-retention devices. Phase H Stormwater management should be fully implemented at the source.
6. Streams should be relocated instead of being piped where impacts to waters can be avoided by
relocating jurisdictional channels and providing buffer zones using state-of-the-art natural channel
design techniques. All relocated stream channels must be stable and provide typical piedmont stream
habitats Relocated streams must ensure geomorphic stability and biological functions by using state-
of-the-art natural stream design methodologies. Stability and habitat monitoring should be provided as
routinely required in 404 Permits and 401 Certifications.
7. If there are more appropriate streams in the project area that could benefit from restoration
activities and improved buffers, alternative restoration sites should be thoroughly evaluated and
compared to the proposed restorations along unnamed tributaries. If other entities have plans for
it is our
additional restoration activities within the project area, that information should provided.
NCDOT
understanding that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
htt :/Ivv?tin.ncdot.or doh/ reconstruct/ /neu/default.html) cooperatively finance= plan and construct
stream and wetland mitigation with landowners willing to participate in their Stream Mitigation
Program or with the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Private stream restoration and mitigation
j banks may be interested in such projects. Portions of the main stem of Abbotts Creek appear to have
i been straightened or channelized. Stream incision, bank erosion and sedimentation are problematic.
A restoration activity on the main stem of Abbott's Creek to restore floodplain access appears to be
practicable. Properly planned and constructed, restoration should significantly reduce streambank
erosion, improve aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem functions, and support maintenance of the water
supply watershed of Lake Thom-A-Lex.
8. The project should be constructed in small phases to reduce sediment impacts to the water supply
watershed unless alternatives can reduce overall impacts. Stringent sediment and erosion control
activities for sensitive waters should be used to protect downstream aquatic environments. b the
recommend that these measures exceed standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) Y
NC Division of Land Resources. In addition, these practices must adhere to standard Division of
Water Quality's 401 Certification requirements.
9. Buffers that have been diminished or reduced in the municipal service area served by the main
sewer installed for this subdivision should be restored. Such an area of diminished buffering appears
to be present on the east bank along the main stem of Abbotts Creek between 1-40 and Old Salem
e 4 - February 6, 2006
'Caleb Creek Subdivision, Abbotts Creels -Page
Road. Flooding of adjacent residential properties has been previously reported in this area. Another
area where buffer restoration would be beneficial is on Abbotts Creek between Bridgeport Road and
Shields Road. The circumvention of buffer protection requirements should be prevented through a
coordinated effort by local government's planning and zoning authorities.
to. Adequate riparian forested buffers should be provided for stream stability, wildlife habitat and
stream shading. Buffers should be undisturbed forested areas instead of tiered buffers to preserve
stream integrity, water quality and habitat values to the extent possible. We have continually
recommend 50' buffers for intermittent channels and 100' buffers for perennial waters in this area As
the NCWRC recommended during the environmental assessment for the. sewer line, minimum 50'
undisturbed forested buffers should be provided for intermittent and perennial jurisdictional waters to
help offset lost terrestrial habitats and to maintain important aquatic ecosystem functions. Buffer
width averaging may be utilized by following natural floodplain contours providing these are
contiguous habitats. The Commission did not concur with two-tiered buffers.
11. Where high density development will occur in WS III watersheds generally, the 100' buffer rule
for High Density Development is @:I SA NCAC 2B .0215 (3) (b) (i) (G). The Randleman Rules
adopted by the Town of Kernersville and Forsyth County should require adding an additional 50' to the
already mandatory 50' covered by Zones I & 2 as specified in 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (8). It is our
understanding that the first 50' of the buffer is proposed to be forested while the remaining porti
(70') will be vegetated. We recommend that the larger buffers for high density consists of a 50150
split minimum between forested and vegetated. Additional forested buffer areas should be provided
when possible.
12. Buffers along jurisdictional streams should be permanently preserved and protected through
enforced conservation easements. Conservation easements should be placed on all buffers along all
jurisdictional waters and wetlands within the entire development, not just on the golf course.
Permanent conservation easements (includes streams and their buffers) should be provided as intact,
non-fragmented common areas instead of being subdivided into individual lots with deed restrictions.
Public nature trails may be incorporated into buffers providing they are located near the outer edges of
the buffer zones and provided they do not exceed widths specified in the Americans with Disability
Act (ADA) and they are constructed of pervious materials.
13. No individual lot fill of jurisdictional waters or wetlands should be allowed. Where jurisdictional
or isolated wetlands are present, these areas should be protected through new subdivision
configurations with green spaces in order to reduce lost terrestrial habitats and to provide water quality
and habitat benefits. Existing habitats and geological features should be incorporated into site plans
whenever practicable where these features can provide mitigation for lost water quality functions and
wildlife habitats.
14. Low Impact Development (LID) techniques are recommended for all development that will be
facilitated or promoted by this core subdivision. Information about LID practices and techniques can
be found at n-AANio',r-impactdetielonment.ora. It is essential that post development hydrograp
conditions mimic those present in the area prior to additional urban development and increased
imperviousness. To do less will exacerbate stormwater issues and increase the intensity and severity of
downstream flooding and stream instability which will lead to increased sediment impacts to the
downstream water supply.
15. The size, location and adequacy of any proposed bio-retention facilities, interceptor drains and
wetlands should be documented and thoroughly evaluated during site planning and permit approvals
by the US Army Corps of Engineers, the NC Division of Land Resources and the NC Division of
Water Quality.
16.The project and the municipality must be in compliance with the 10/70 provisions of 15ANCAC
2B .0214(3) (b) (1) E which deals with imperviousness outside the critical area for water supply
i
5 - February 6, 2006
'Caleb Creek Subdivision, Abbotts Creek -Page
watersheds within the urban boundaries in place on July 1, 1993 as appropriate and required. It is our
understanding that municipal annexations do not dilute existing impervious impacts. Considerable
imperviousness has been added to this watershed for commercial/industrial developments, roadways,
as well as gravel and paved parking lots since 1993.
17. If stormwater ponds or wetlands will be required or provided, the attached planting
recommendations should be considered to mitigate for thermal impacts to waters as well as to mitigate
for impacts to indigenous wildlife species. Native plants and grasses should be used to the maximum
extent possible.
18. Due to anticipated diminished native forests and edge species habitats and ongoing concerns about
invasivetexotic species, consultation with NC Department of Agriculture agents or NCWRC biologists
is recommended prior to stocking any ponds or streams with fish or other aquatic species, including
aquatic plants.
19. Where ponds are built or reestablished, downstream base flows should not be reduced or modified
below the 7Q10. Where downstream flows have been reduced previously, the 7Q10 should be
restored. If possible, existing ponds should be restored to stream ecosystems and provided with
appropriate buffers, especially where conversion would diminish flood issues.
20. Many agricultural and golf course chemicals are water soluble easily transported through
subsurface flow, and highly toxic to aquatic life. Integrated Pest Management practices should be fully
implemented for golf course maintenance and operations. Irrigation waters should be recycled to the
maximum extent possible. The golf course should be designed and managed to meet minimum
environmental protection or certification standards developed for Audubon International's Cooperative
Sanctuary Programs. Additional golf course design and development information may be obtained
from Audubon International at httn audubonintl or?lnrogram Laacssl olf htm.
21. Where flyways must be cleared around or over jurisdictional waters and buffers, removal of
riparian plants should be minimized. Large or tall tree removal should be limited to preserve the
r integrity of the riparian buffer zone: Smaller plantings may be maintained as buffers providing they
are generally undisturbed habitats. Judicious plant removal may be needed; however, buffer zone
management should be a water quality management priority for golf course operations.
22 project proponents may wish to contact the US Fish and Wildlife Service to discuss funding
opportunities under the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation. Act of 2000 (P.L.106-247). The act
provides grants to Latin America, the Caribbean and the United States for the conservation of
neotropical migratory birds that winter south of the border and summer in North America. 'flue law
encourages habitat protection, education, researching, monitoring, and capacity building to provide for
the long-terns protection of neotropical migratory birds.
23. Consideration should be given to relocating the proposed driving range stream instead of piping if
sufficient flow and buffers can be provided. This stream appears to a strong intermittent stream or
possibly a perennial channel
We are concerned about impacts of this large development and future developments associated with this new sewer
line to game species, non-game species and aquatic species. Some direct and many indirect impacts toga species
and non-game species can be reduced or mitigated through the provision of the above recommendations. Without
adequate provision of stormwater management and undisturbed forested buffer provisions, the aquatic species its the
area are likely to be diminished or extirpated due to urban pollutants and streambank destabilization and erosion.
Activities instituted to protect these natural resources will help preserve and protect water quality in the water supply
watershed as well as enhance development aesthetics. Land stewardship activities provided for Caleb's Creek will
likely set precedents for ancillary projects that are proposed for the area.
6 - February 6, 2006
"Caleb Creek Subdivision, Abbotts Creek -Page
Since this review is based on conceptual plans, our comments should be considered as preliminary. It is important
that project proponents, the US Army Corps of Engineers, and the NC Division of Water Quality provide this office
with updated final site plans, and permit/certification proposals so that we can provide follow up comments. We will
try to respond in a timely manner. Generally, it appears that project proponents for this development have taken the
time and care to ensure a review of ecosystem impacts which should provide beneficial long-term environmental
stewardship of this core development.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any questions regarding these
comments, please contact me at 3361769-9453.
Attachment: Piedmont Stonmwater Pond Planting Recommendations
Ec: Bryan Tompkins, USFWS
Sarah McRae, NBP
Becky Fox, USEPA
Daryl Lamb, DWQ-WSRO
Lee Spencer, DWS
Steve Mauney, DWQ-WSRO
' Caleb Credo Subdivision, Abbotts Creek Page 7 -
Piedmont Stormwater Pond Planting Recommendations
Instead of using the typical fescue grasses,
planted with the following mix:
Spring/Summer Mixture, MaY 1 - Sept. 16
February 6, 2006
the upper interior and exterior of the structure should be
FalUW!nter Mixture, Sept. IS - April 30
Browntop millet 20 lbs/a Winter wheat 120 lbs/a
Kobe lespedeza 20 lbs/a Kobe lespedeza 20 lbs/a
Shrub lespedeza I lb/a Shrub lespedeza 1 lb/a
Switchgrass* 5 Wit Switchgrass* 5 lb/ac
Add to fall or spring plantings: `Tioga' Deertongue (Panicum clandestinum) at a rate of ? lbs. Pure Live
Seeds (PLS) per acre.
* When possible on slopes less than 3:1 use Switchgrass instead of lespedezas and on slopes greater than 3:1 use
Orchard Grass or Creeping Red Fescue. Other native species may be appropriate depending on soil, slope, and
region. Korean lespedeza may be appropriate in colder geophysical areas. We do not recommend Sericea
lespedeza. Native plants and warm season grasses are preferred over exotic plants.
Add one of the following to the above mixture:
Creeping Red Fescue 5 lbs/acre
Ladino Clover** 5 ibs/acre
Atlantic Coastal Panic Grass 5 lbs/acre (PLS)
Alfalfa** 5 lbs/acre (requires fertilizer containing Boron)
** Lime & fertilize disturbed areas according to NRCS soil test results and follow planting guidelines as appropriate
and necessary. Depending on elevation and region, other native species may be appropriate. Note that mowing
should be limited to late winter or early spring. Mowing should only occur as needed to prevent unwanted tree
growth on s 2-3 year schedule.
The provision of shade around impounded waters can significantly reduce thermal impacts. Trees and
shrubs (1 year bare root seedlings) should be planted randomly at a minimal rate of 100 trees per acre on
the top and upper portions of the structure and at a minimal rate of 150 per acre around the normal water
elevation and littoral shelf area. The following list of tree species may assist in providing habitat benefits:
Loblolly Pine* Red Cedar Black Gum American Molly
Oak
Will Dogwood
Red Maple**
Hickory
Oak Sumac
Viburnum White Oak
Green Ash ow
Ironwood Black Cherry
Persimmon Water Oak Spice Bush Willow (sp) Serviceberry
Swamp Chestnut Silky Dogwood
Other species may be utilized depending on site requirements and native plant availability. Pines* should not
exceed 15% of the reforestation. No more than 20% of the tree species will be of a single species. An 801/6 success
rate is acceptable over five years. Large or fast growing trees like Sycamore and Maple** may not be appropriate
near detention facility dams.
Additional planting suggestions and plant supply sources may be obtained from Stewardship biologist,
Elizabeth Hughes at 828/651-8380.
r.
-©? W A;TFR4 Michael F. Easley, Governor
\Q G William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
r North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
January 26, 2006
DWQ Project # 05-2116
Forsyth County
CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEII'T REQUESTED
Ms. Debbie Joyce
Caleb Creek Properties, LLC
342 N. Elm Street, Suite 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
Subject Property: Caleb's Creek Subdivision
Abbotts Creek [030707,12-119-(l), WSIH]
REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION
Dear Ms. Joyce:
On November 23, 2005, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your application dated November
18, 2005 to impact 5.75 acres of wetland, 6,903 linear feet of stream and 2.165 acres of open waters to
construct the proposed Caleb's Creek Subdivision. The DWQ has determined that your application was
incomplete and/or provided inaccurate information as discussed below. The DWQ will require additional
information in order to process your application to impact protected wetlands and/or streams on the
subject property. Therefore, unless we receive five copies of the additional information requested below,
we will have to move toward denial of your application as required by 15A NCAC 2H .0506 and will
place this project on hold as incomplete until we receive this additional information. Please provide the
following information so that we may continue to review your project.
Additional Information Requested:
1. Please provide five copies of a complete and comprehensive set of plans for the project on full
size plan sheets at the largest scale available. These plans should also be overlain with elevation
contours, streams (including centerlines and top-of-bank where appropriate), 'isolated and non-
isolated wetlands, open waters, buffers in accordance with local ordinances, proposed stormwater
BMPs, sediment and erosion control measures, proposed lot layout, proposed roads and all
proposed utilities.
2. Please provide five copies of full size detail sheets depicting all stream impacts (including all fill
slopes, dissipaters, and bank stabilization), isolated and non-isolated wetland impacts (including
all fill slopes) and open waters impacts at a minimum scale of 1"=50'. Please also include the
location of sediment and erosion control measures (silt fencing) and orange fencing, and provide
the location and details for any diffuse flow measures as appropriate.
3. Please provide cross section details showing the provisions for aquatic life passage.
4. Please specify the percent of project imperviousness area based on the estimated built-out
conditions.
N.oQne Carolina
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit tuCally
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet: httn://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/l0% Post Consumer Paper
Caleb Creek Properties, LLC
Page 2 of 2
January 26, 2006
5. Please provide the signed Jurisdiction Determination map from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
6. Please provide a detailed and comprehensive stormwater plan per the requirements of your
proposed activities within a WSIH watershed.
7. Please provide a detailed and comprehensive proposed mitigation plan.
8. Please provide an indirect and cumulative impacts analysis for your project, especially the parcels
adjacent to your proposed thoroughfares.
9. Please provide the DWQ with a copy of the City of Kernersville stream buffer requirements.
Please contact the DWQ within three weeks of the date of this letter to verify that you have received this
letter and that you remain interested in continuing to pursue permitting of your project and will be
providing the DWQ the requested information at a later date. Please contact me in writing and Daryl
Lamb of the DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office. If we do not hear from you within three weeks, we
will assume that you no longer want to pursue this project and we will consider the project as withdrawn.
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to wetlands, waters
or protected buffers. Please be aware that any impacts requested within your application are not
authorized (at this time) by the DWQ. Please call Ms. Cyndi Karoly or Mr. Ian McMillan at 919-733-
1786 if you have any questions regarding or would like to set up a meeting to discuss this matter.
Sincerely,
t
Cyndi Karoly, Supervisor
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
CBKlijm
cc: Daryl Lamb, DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office
USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
File Copy
Central Files
Chris Huysman, Wetland & Natural Resource Consultants, Inc., P.O. Box 224, Newton, NC 28658
Filename: 052116CalebsCreekSD(Forsyth)On_Hold
Attns Chris `nuysman DWQ # 05-2116 Calebs Creek S/D
Subject: Attn: Chris Huysman DWQ # 05-2116 Calebs Creek S/D
From: Laurie Dennison <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:32:48 -0500
To: [e-mail]
Please see attached the Division of Water Quality's request for more information
related to your recent application. Please note that this message is being forwarded
to you electronically so that you may expedite preparation of your response. Please
do not send your response as a reply to this e-mail or via fax. The hard copy is
being sent via US Mail. All response correspondence is to be mailed via hard copy to
the 401 Oversight and Express Permits Unit, 2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC, 27604
unless otherwise noted.
Content-Type: application/msword
052116CalebsCreekSD(Forsyth)On_Hold.doc Content-Encoding: base64
-----=- -- ----- ----- -= -= --------- • --
1 of 1 1/30/2006 3:35 PM
i
Cyr G+?d raiY
r
January 10, 2006
Mr. John Thomas
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
Re: Public Comment re: Caleb Creek Properties, LLC
Application to Impact Stream Channels, Wetlands, and g @ R ??(?
Jurisdictional Waters Under Sections 401 and 404 of the 15 D
Clean Water Act JAN 1 3 2005
Corps Action ID #200620218
t)ENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Dear Mr. Thomas:
As an adjacent property owner, I have concerns regarding potential flood hazards, surface water quality
impacts, and the cumulative negative environmental impacts of the proposed 939 acre project and other
planned construction in the immediate watershed area.
The Public Notice/Application do not adequately address the following:
• Predicted impacts to municipal water supply, specifically water quality impacts to perennial and
intermittent streams and wetlands comprising jurisdictional waters of the Lower Abbots Creek
Watershed which feed Lake Thom-A-Lex in Davidson County, which, in turn, provides drinking
water to the cities of Lexington and Thomasville.
• Increased flood potential during adverse storm events. Flood impact studies should be performed.
(Refer to correspondence dated April 18, May 11, and May 22, 2001 with accompanying
photographs, attached.)
• Identification of the types and concentration/quantities of potential contaminants, in addition to
sediment (petroleum, nitrates, etc.), which may impact the jurisdictional waters both during the
construction phases and long term.
• Predicted degradation of surface water quality and plans for short-term erosion control measures
in addition to the proposed conservation easements and 50 ft buffers.
i
• Compliance with local watershed ordinances. Are the proposed 50 ft buffers intended to be
riparian areas as defined by UDO-147, wherein the innermost 30 ft of the 50 ft buffer is
"I

?f
Mr. John Thomas
January 10, 2006
Page 2
undisturbed and the buffers applicable to both intermittent and perennial streams?
• Identification of the location and differentiation of perennial and intermittent streams on the Public
Notice attachments. Additionally, there is no explanation key for the shaded, stipled, and cross-
hatched areas shown on the attachments (Sheets 4-33), making public review and comment
difficult.
• Clarification of how stream restoration in the vicinity of existing wetlands (such as the proposed
stream restoration in the area of Impact 10) will affect the hydrology of the existing wetland(s).
• With regard to the proposed plugging of open ditches with clay barriers to promote inundation of
historical wetland areas, the historic flood plain/wetland areas north of Hedgecock Road were
cleared and drained to support agricultural uses during the 1950s and 60s by the construction of
hand-dug blind ditches. Have these effectively collapsed and/or how will these be addressed in
the efforts to inundate historic wetlands?
• Per the 2001 NC DENR inventory of dams, the existing downstream earth dam is a low hazard
(Class A) dam. Will the hazard classification be revised (as per the Dam Safety Act of 1967)
due to the increased residential risk? Rehabilitation of the dam should be consistent with any
revised hazard classification since failure of the dam(s) would have an adverse impact on existing
streams, in addition to the hazard to downstream residents.
• Investigation for the presence of threatened and endangered species and impacts to sensitive
habitat. As documented by Franklin T. McBride of the Habitat Conservation Program (June 22,
2001 attachment); the bog turtle, a federally listed Threatened Species, and the red-cockaded
woodpecker and the small-anthered bittercress, both federally listed Endangered Species, have
been documented in wetlands and habitat of Forsyth County similar to those of the project area.
Has an actual site survey been performed?
• Methodology and schedule of surface water monitoring to allow verification that discharges do not
have an adverse effect on existing water quality. In this regard, monitoring should be performed
under pre-construction low flow conditions to allow post-construction comparison to baseline
conditions.
Based on neighbor's comments, the Public Notice attachments (Sheets 4-33) are not clear to many of the
area residents, which discourages representative public comment. An informational Public Hearing would
be of benefit to these residents and is therefore requested. The Public Hearing should describe the
application materials in detail, the Permitting process, impacts, and proposed mitigation measures.
Mr. John Thomas
January 10, 2006
Page 3
i
I understand that some of my concerns maybe outside Corps/NC DWQ jurisdiction. However, Corps and
NC DWQ review should, at a minimum, include evaluation of the cumulative environmental and water
supply impacts of this and the several other 100+ acre pending and proposed major residential/commercial
projects in the Lower Abbotts Creek Watershed, including the proposed roads and bridges associated with
the planned east-west 4-lane highway to extend from the existing Dell Plant to Teague Lane, south of and
parallel to Hedgecock Road. Protection of the sensitive riprarian areas and minimization of flood-related
impacts in consideration of cumulative impacts within the watershed, rather than on a project-by-project
basis, is cheaper than public investment in enhanced water treatment and mitigation of sensitive habitat and
affected properties which have been impacted by increased flood frequency/degree and stream degradation.
Copies of specific related background correspondence regarding the long-term public and regulatory
interest and concerns related to this project (formerly the Pine Hills Development) are attached.
I would appreciate notification of Corps/NC DWQ resolution of my comments and concerns. Please
contact me if you have any questions. Further, I would be available to walk the subject property and other
planned development areas impacting the watershed with you or your staff if a first-hand inspection of the
properties would be of assistance in your review.
Sincerely,
R. ward edgecock, P.E., P.G.
5979 Hedg cock Road
Kernersville, NC 27284
[phone]
Attachments
cc:
Ms. Cyndi Karoly w/att
Ms. Melba McGee w/att
Mr. Richard L. Thomas w/o att
Mr. Daryl Lamb w/att
?"'$1111#81e.,O
`R )
A, efol
O
1 (?? •.r'l a..b h?Y
? ti, • •.., r r? rt., '?s
• i i i
Sr 44
St AL .
July 17, 2002
i
John Thomas
Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
Re: Proposed Abbotts Creek Basin Sewer
DENR Project #1122, Town of Kernersville 201 Facilities Plan, Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Thomas:
I appreciate your taking the time this past Monday to discuss the stream classifications/wetlands
delineation of tributaries to the Pine Tree Branch of Abbotts Creek. Beginning just north of
Hedgecock Road, within the area encircled, I have questions regarding the mapped tertiary order
streams/wetlands to Abbotts Creek. The feature nearest Hedgecock Road is a spring fed
intermittent stream; a wetlands classification may not be appropriate. The second feature, the
"trapped" stream as shown on the map, is most likely the western-most extension of the perennial
stream which crosses the existing Par 3 No. 12 fairway near the tee and feeds the Pine Tree
Branch. The third feature, also a perennial stream, begins at "Lane's Pond", crosses the
southern-most end of the No. 13 fairway, and also feeds the Pine Tree Branch.
I have not walked nor fished the other mapped areas since I was a kid so I cannot offer specific
comments regarding other areas without field reconnaissance of the 1 in = 500 ft scale aerial
photography provided by Kernersville. However, I am concerned about the accuracy of the
enclosed map since I understand that perennial streams will require buffers at sewer crossings
while, under certain conditions, wetlands may not. I suspect several of the tertiary-order streams
in other areas may inadvertently be unmapped or incorrectly classified.
Thank you for your assistance. Please call when you've had a chance to review. If you are in
the area, I can be available to walk these areas with you, if this will help. I can also introduce
you to the local farmers who are probably the best resource of knowledge regarding the streams.
Sincerely,
R. Edward H gecock, P.E., P.G
5979 Hedgecock Road
Kernersville, NC 27284
[phone] (work)
SR 2637 !
f?17 ?1? ® I 'C?/ I r
1 \
AUBQTI !, Cr. f
i f I.1MP\'A I
LL
N3ANI(:N:.D)
r i
OLENNyICW DR
SR 2837 a'. L rij I
V
PIN: 1RfF INTERCEPTOR -?\ •?., /? r
•f f.0{LAL I !?1J?-ZO. ??y 1
A LF
f)r? I T h oU
U
Cock
c kp \ t 7? -
2683 I I,J
1 J - AU1301 fS QiEt.K INTER: FP I!)N
nrlA
vii 1 7• ?:•
?i
I• a)N7 ,;0 ABUOTTS CREEK
FORCE MAIN
/,70 T ? I 1
?? ••'• - NEW ABBOTIS CREEK.
PUMP STATION
(BY OTHERS) I
''. WATKINS F I
I _ .. .. ... ... ORO RD
SR 2624 '
1 1
LG D
w:. TER c;I;atACF\
.?:.. DELINEATED WETLANDS (HOR)
IA i.INF. A.IED WETLANDS (F:CS) ? -' APPROXIMATE WETLANDS - JAN 1 3 2006
'GA'WK 1-LO(YJPLAIN STREAMS
l;EIN'R - WATER UUALI TY
WE RVIDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
_.' CITY/COUNTY UTILITY COMMISSION
ABBOTTS CREEK Figure 3: Abbotts Creek Hydrology and Wetlands
INTERCEPTORS
AND FORCE MAIN -
- -Jon, 2002 00162-201 -U38 -^v
WNCiI ON-c;Ai.EM PRO.). NO. 71438 NORTH CAROLINA s r ----- -------- -- _.._.
W-1
. t' = 1000• WET - 01
I '
r?C 14 7
r -1 akfA (z

August 7, 2001
Board of Aldermen
i
Town of Kernersville
P.O. Drawer 728
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728
Subject: Proposed Change in Zoning of Pine Tree Property/Zoning Docket No. K-570
Dear Sir/Madam:
I include myself with the majority of the surrounding neighbors who would prefer the Pine Tree
Golf Course area retain its rural atmosphere and character, but who have understood for some
time that extension of sewer services to this portion of the Abbotts Creek basin would inevitably
precipitate growth and increased density of development. Balancing many considerations and after
much thought, I am in favor of the Caleb's Creek development as proposed.
The quality of this 937-acre development will set precedent for future growth in this part of
Forsyth County. I therefore support retention of the golf course in the proposed form surrounded
by a mix of appropriate housing and other land uses compatible with the surrounding
neighborhoods and environs. Although I share the concerns expressed by many regarding the
project's potential negative impacts; including, traffic, inadequacies of existing roads and bridges,
school construction needs, utilities, protection of existing/future water supply, and solid waste
disposal needs, I feel the Ridgewood Group's revised plan coupled with the Town's proposed
special conditions and impact fees, though imperfect, are not an unreasonable compromise of the
conflicting rights and interests of the landowner, the developer, the Town of Kernersville, the
adjacent property owners, and other taxpayers. I can only hope that the enhanced property values
associated with the golf course proposal will somehow partially mitigate the burdens that the
increased population density will place on the surrounding residents and environment.
Descendants of many of the Scotch, Irish, English, and Germanic immigrants who received land
grants and settled the Abbotts Creek Basin during the 1750's - 1780's, about the time of Caleb
Story, David Morrow, William Dobson, and subsequently Dobson's Inn and Tavern and Kerner's
Crossroads, but roughly 100 years before the incorporation of Kernersville in 1871, are ambng
-the many surrounding residents. These families include the Browns,_ Idols, Teagues, Lanes,
Clodfelters, Bodenheimers, Staffords, Shields, Beesons, Boyles, Lautens, Williards, Stewarts,
Georges, Spurgeons, Matthews, Tuckers, Blackburns, Hedgecocks, Welchs, Weavils, Chamelins,
and Smiths, among many others. These families were, for the most part, farmers and carpenters
Board of Aldermen
August 7, 2001
Page 2
of modest means who earned a livelihood off the land and waters bordering Abbotts Creek and
its tributaries. They have conserved the land, water, and resources for over 200 years to the
present benefit of the Town of Kernersville and the downstream residents of Lexington and
Thomasville. Over the next decade, 1 hope and pray that the Town of Kernersville will make
wise use of the lands and waters that these families have preserved.
Thank you for your reasoned and objective consideration of these matters.
Sincerely,
i
412/ it '
R. Edward He ecock, P.E., P.G.
5979 Hedgeco Road
Kernersville, NC 27284
[phone]

Town of Kernersvllls - Planning Department • 134 East Mountain Street
Kemorsvill• • NC • 27284 • (P) 336.982.0605 • (F) 336.999.2046
Fax
Toi Ed Hedgecock From Jeff Hatling
Few 273-4057 Pagesc 2 (in5!! i C`Oveo
PhonN Dq?el 08/09/01
Ra CCI
? Urgent D For Review ? Please Comment ? Please Reply ? Please Reoycls
Per Your Request

cor
THE CITY OF 0 LEXINGTON
NORTH y ?r CAROLINA
ch4?V
"GROWING WITH THE PIEDMONT"
OFFICE OF THE
MAYOR
Mr. Larry R. Brown, Mayor
Town of Kernersville
P. O. Box 728
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728
June 1, 2001
Subject: Pine Hills Development
Town of Kernersville's Development Standards and Impact
on the Watershed of Lake Thom-A-Lex
Dear Mayor Brown:
Our staff has reviewed and evaluated the "Planning Staff Report on Request for Rezoning."
They have given me a favorable report on its content and completeness. If implemented fully
as proposed, the plan would protect Lexington's water supply adequately.
Mayor Brown, I could endorse this plan if l knew it would be carried out properly. Our staff
was impressed with the level of thoroughness displayed by your staff and their commitment to
properly implement the project. They were also pleased with the actions of the Kernersville
Planning Board regarding this development. I will monitor the implementation of this plan
closely, but once approved, the Town of Kernersville will have a much smaller say in the way
the developer proceeds. This prevents us from having an acceptable level of comfort regarding
the future of this project.
In the end, jurisdictional boundaries are of little consequence in protecting a water supply.
unless my memory is faulty, 1 believe Kernersville's water supply was poisoned and had to turn
to Winston-Salem many years ago. If such was the case, I am sure the Town of Kernersville is
.
sympathetic to our concerns. My endorsement of, or opposition to, this project means very
little in its effect. We have registered our concerns with you and your staff and are pleased with
the completeness of your report and recommendations. We now await the implementation and
follow through.
Thank you for any and all you can do to protect the water supply of Lexington and Thomasville.
Sincerely,
RichMayor
RLT/tsl
22 WEST CENTER STREET - LEXINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 27292 - PH. 336-248-3910 - FAX [phone]
July 24, 2001
Ms. Melba McGee
Environmental Review Coordinator
Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
1600 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
Subject: DENR Project 1/1122, Town of Kernersville 201 Facilities Plan, Forsyth County
Dear Ms. McGee:
Thank you for the courtesy of providing me a copy of your July 10 memo to Mr. Reginald Sutton
of the Construction Grants' group.
I concur with DENR's assessment of the inadequacy of the subject document in its current form
and the need for compensatory mitigative measures to address the impacts of the proposed project.
Upon submittal of the revised EA, I request the opportunity to review the amended document and
request that a public comment period be allowed so that any remaining issues regarding potential
environmental impacts, protection of the drinking water supplies of downstream residents, and the
concerns of adjacent and affected property owners may be addressed in a timely fashion. As
necessary, please forward my request to the appropriate staff or State agency having jurisdiction
over the public review/public hearing process.
If you have any questions, please call.
Sincerely,
R. Edward Hedgecock, P.E., P.G.
5979 Hedgecock Road
Kernersville, NC 27284
North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Reginald Sutton
Construction Grants
Melba McGee ?Y
Environmental Review Coordinator
JAN 1 v 2006
UENk - NA-1--i QUALITY
TLANDS MD STORMWpTER BRANCH
#1122 Town of Kernersville 201 Facilities Plan, Forsyth County
July 10, 2001
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) has completed its
internal review of the proposed project.
The purpose of the project is to provide a public wastewater collection system to
certain areas within the Deep River and Abbotts Creek Basins. Out of the three
alternatives studied, Alternative B-2 was identified as the preferred alternative and would
ultimately service about 7,700 acres. A project of this magnitude must adequately address
all aspects of the proposal in order to determine if it would result in significant effects on
the environment. At this point, the EA is considered too vague to adequately evaluate the'
potential environmental impacts of the project.
The expansion of infrastructure in an area previously undeveloped can encourage
growth. Such development could cause a variety of indirect and secondary environmental
impacts including loss of wildlife habitat/forest resources, increased stormwater runoff and
erosion, wetland filling and water quality impacts. This raises the question of whether
impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels to support a FONSI. After
avoidance and minimization, the significance of a project's impact is-determined by the
ability of the applicant to commit to compensatory mitigation. Implementing measures to
offset project impacts and protect downstream drinking water supplies is critical and
essential for the protection and preservation of these sensitive areas. Examining
cumulative impacts is also essential in determining the significance of the impacts and in
developing appropriate mitigation.
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: 919 - 733-4984 \ FAX: 919 - 715-3060 \ Internet: www.enr.state.ne.us/ENR/
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY \ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 509'. RECYCLED / 10% POST CONSUMERPAPER
Before concurring with the EA, there are several points that will need further
clarification, as noted in the attached comments. If the applicant intends to proceed with
a FONSI, it is recommended that they address the issues raised by our commenting
agencies and incorporate measures that will reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
The ability of DENR to sign off on the use of an EA/FONSI will depend upon the
adequacy of the applicant to fully address the concerns identified by our agencies,
including avoidance and minimization of impacts and providing adequate compensatory
mitigation. The EA is not presently adequate to serve as a decision making document.
The applicant would benefit by incorporating agency recommendations and modifying the
EA. If information within the EA continues to be inadequate resubmission as a DEIS is
possible.
The applicant is urged to meet with our commenting agencies to begin discussing the
issues prior to finalizing the revised document. This will help avoid unnecessary delays.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Please let me know if I can be of further
assistance.
Attachments
cc: Frank McBride
Lee Spencer
Steve Mauney
Milt Rhodes
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
June 27, 2001
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
FROM: Milt Rhodes'
Division of Water Qua ity
SUBJECT: Town of Kernersville, 201 Facility Plan Document and Environmental Assessment.
DENR #1122, DWQ # 12899
The Division of Water Quality (Division) has reviewed the 201 Facility Plan Document and
Environmental Assessment for the Town of Kernersyille, and offers the following comments on
the document. Please consider this document to be a draft version and that further materials are
needed in order to proceed with the projects identified in the report. The issues identified in this
letter must be addressed prior to going forward with the proposed projects identified in this
document. It is recommended that project applicants hold a scoping meeting with the agencies
of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (Department) prior to submitting
further material.
The Division is concerned with the secondary and cumulative impacts associated with this
project and the direct impacts to streams and wetlands in the Abbotts Creek basin by numerous
utility line crossings. This basin is classified as a Water Supply Watershed III watershed, and
has more stringent development standards. Additionally, this area of the Abbotts Creek
watershed serves as the headwater area for a large water supply watershed, which supports
numerous downstream users, therefore it is appropriate to evaluate potential environmental
impacts more extensively. The Division is concerned that this document does not evaluate direct
impacts to streams and wetlands in enough detail, and has not sufficiently evaluated potential
secondary and cumulative effects due to growth and development issues related to the upgrade
and expansion of water and sewer infrastructure in the region.
The Division is also concerned that past projects in this area may have bypassed the State
Environmental Protection Act review process. The Division does not allow the "piece-mewling"
of projects. These past projects are now proposed to join up with. new infrastructure upgrade
efforts and but have not undergone any regulatory review for potential impacts. The Division
desires the applicants to discuss in detail the relationship of projects constructed within the past
five years, specifically the Union Cross Business Park connection, to the proposed projects in the
existing environmental document.
Additionally, there is no mention of mitigative measures within the document to address the
significant anticipated secondary and cumulative impacts associated with this project. AV®4
IV ustom N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 [phone] C1 800 er Service
623-7748
Division concurs with the Wildlife Resources Commission and the Division of Environmental
Health on the need to generate more detailed information on specific stream crossings by utility
lines, location of pumping stations and associated infrastructure, and specific impacts on wetland
habitat where endangered and/or sensitive species may be located. It is recommended that the
project applicants also work toward determining the location of all jurisdictional waters within
the project area, as standardized map products are known to be inaccurate and unreliable. It is
also imperative that the project applicant work with the Town of Kernersville to develop
ordinances and regulations that will minimize the secondary and cumulative impacts associated
with further development in this portion of the county. These ordinances should address
development patterns, impervious surfaces, conservation of open space, relationship to water
features, flood control and management of stormwater runoff, and impact to sensitive habitats.
While the Division concurs with the comments provided by the Wildlife Resources Commission
and the Division of Environmental Health, the Division does not concur with the need for an EIS
at this point and suggests that the applicants pursue a mitigated EA/FONSI. The Division
requests that the Department of Environment and Natural Resources postpone its decision
regarding which document type is needed until after having the opportunity to review an
environmental document providing response to comments from the agencies of the Department
and review specific mitigative measures.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have any questions regarding these
comments, please contact me directly at [phone] x366.
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 9
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Melba McGee, Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Franklin T. McBride, Supervisor
Habitat Conservation Program

DATE:
June 22, 2001
SUBJECT: State Clearinghouse Project No. 1122, Town of Kernersville 201 Facilities Plan
Amendment (Plan), Town of Kernersville and the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County
Utility Commission; Sewer Extensions, Sewer Pump Stations and Force Mains
for Expanded Service Areas, Deep River and Abbotts Creek Basins, Southeast
Forsyth County
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our review and comments on the 201
Facilities Plan Amendment for the above referenced project. These comments are provided in
accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d.) and the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (G.S. 113A-1
through 113A-10; 1 NCAC 25). The purpose of the plan's preferred alternative is to provide
sewage service to about 7,700 acres within the Deep River and, primarily, the Abbotts Creek
Basins. The overall project study area encompasses four separate drainage areas consisting of
10,400 acres.
Plan Alternative A will serve 4,000 acres in areas that are relatively developed. This alternative
appears to facilitate less sprawl than the other alternatives. Plan Alternative B-1 will serve
10,400 acres while Alternative B-2 will serve 7,700 acres that are relatively rural The plan
indicates Alternative B-2 as the preferred alternative. The Plan proposes to provide sewage
service to 7,700 acres within the Deep River and Abbotts Creek watersheds. Both basins are
classified by the Division of Water Quality as Water Supply basins. The total project area
reportedly encompasses 9,700 acres. For the preferred alternative, the Deep River basin facilities
will consist of 18,600 linear feet of 8"- 18" sewer line, 7,300 linear feet of force main, and a
Twin Creek Pump Station with a capacity of 1.80 MGD. The Abbotts Creek basin facilities will
consist of 14,900 linear feet of 27"- 30" sewer line, 25,000 linear feet of force main, and a Lower
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries 1 1721 Alail Service Center - Raleigh, NC 2 7699-1 72 1
Kemersville 201 Facilities Plan 2 06/22/01
Clearinghouse # 1122
Abbotts Creek Pump Station with a capacity of 6.94 MGD. Some smaller improvements may be
needed in the developed Muddy Creek basin.
The project will be constructed in two phases. Phase one (1) is in an area with existing
development. Phase two (2) of the project would be the imp]ementation of the Lower Abbotts
Creek facilities. Portions of the areas to be served have been or will be annexed by the Town of
Kernersville. The 201 Facilities Plan Amendment will encourage and facilitate urbanization of
rural areas. These activities are being accomplished cooperatively by the Town of Kernersville,
the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Utility Commission, and private development interests.
Significant public funds are involved in the sewer and urbanization of the area as the Town will
provide $2,545,000 and the Utility Commission will provide $3,800,000 for the sewer. Total
project costs are estimated at $8.92 million.
The Deep River basin area currently has a mixture of residential, industrial, commercial, and
business zoning. As the upper portions of the Abbotts Creek, the Deep River and Muddy Creek
basins are somewhat developed and urbanized, the following comments will predominately, but
not entirely, focus on anticipated secondary impacts to the undeveloped areas of Abbotts Creek.
Much of the utility project easements will cross previously undisturbed land and will follow
existing watercourses in rural areas. Disturbance will occur in habitats important to aquatic life
and wildlife such as deer, beaver, and smaller animals and birds. The area recently annexed in
the Lower Abbotts Creek watershed consists of 935 acres of golf course, riparian floodplains,
and agricultural fields as well as upland and bottomland forests. - Few, if any, residential
structures are within this area., Roughly 3,000 acres has or will become the focus for more urban
sprawl and additional loss of rural habitats. Implementation of the preferred alternative will
"help stimulate future residential, commercial, and industrial growth. The Lower Abbotts Creek
sub-basin (3,700 acres), is largely undeveloped and lacks sewer service." The plan states that "a
large industrial sector will be developed in the southwestern portion of the lower Abbotts Creek
basin along High Point Road. Another industrial area is expected around Union Cross Road and
Interstate 40. Several small commercial areas are expected to arise primarily along Union Cross
Road and Teaque Lane.
We are concerned about the significant secondary and cumulative impacts from increased
developments that will be facilitated by this project. Changes in the landscape will likely result
in a significant loss of wildlife habitat. Major adverse impacts to wetland and stream habitats are
also expected. Rapidly developing urban areas typically produce large quantities of sediment
associated with construction and introduce urban stormwater pollutants. These pollutants are
likely to have significantly greater and longer lasting impacts on downstream habitats than the
installation of the utility line. Increased stormwater flood elevations and flow velocities from
urbanized areas routinely result in major changes in stream geomorphology and impacts to
downstream properties and habitats. These changes usually result in degradation of aquatic
environs through exacerbated flooding, accelerated stream bank erosion, sedimentation and
changes in base flows.
We recommend that stormwater management and riparian protection measures be identified and
implemented that will allow streams and wetlands to remain in natural conditions. We
Kernersville 201 Facilities Plan 3 06/22/01
Clearinghouse # 1122
recommend protecting entire 100-year floodplains from development and using these areas as
green ways and/or natural parks. We also recommend maintaining maximum available forested
buffers along perennial and intermittent streams to protect riparian habitat and water quality.
The growth facilitated by the preferred alternative might necessitate a reclassification of the
Abbotts Creek WS-III basin. To adequately protect the habitat and water quality values, all
jurisdictional waters within the area should be fully delineated prior to any plan reviews and
construction to assist in avoiding and minimizing secondary impacts. A comprehensive
stormwater management plan is recommended that will maintain existing hydrographic
conditions to protect area streams from physical degradation and pollutants that will be generated
by the proposed urbanization.
The bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii), a federally listed Threatened Species, has been found in
Forsyth County. The turtle is known to occur in wetlands associated with agricultural pastures
similar to those in the project area. Surveys should be conducted for this turtle or potential
habitats utilizing the protocol found in "The Restoration & Management of Small Wetlands of
the Mountains & Piedmont in the Southeast". A copy of this publication may be obtained from
Dr. Aim Berry Sommers (336-334-4978) at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
Records indicate that the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) and the small-anthered
bittercress (Cardamine micranthera) both federally listed as Endangered have been documented
in Forsyth County. Surveys for these species as well as any state listed species and their habitats
should be provided. Information on state listed species may be found at the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program web site at www.ncsparks.net/nhp/county.html.
The plan for the utility improvements indicates that the proposed corridors are located in a rural
residential/agricultural area of Forsyth County. It incorrectly indicates that Abbotts Creek
conveys water to Oak Hollow Lake (High Point, NC) and that the West Fork Deep River
conveys water to Lake Thom-A-Lex (Davidson County).
The document indicates that biological sampling data are not available for these waters in
Forsyth County. However, it indicates that there are 154 species of invertebrates and 16 species
of fish that have been identified at downstream Abbotts Creek sampling points. Additionally, 73
species of invertebrates are indicated for the West Fork Deep River. It would be helpful to have
the collection location and any other data for these species included in future environmental
documents. Sport fisheries do not appear to be directly impacted by the sewer project as a
typical construction moratorium is indicated, which is designed to minimize the adverse effects
of elevated turbidity and sediment during the most critical spawning and early developmental
period.
Anticipated secondary and cumulative impacts of 5,000 or more new residents on 935 acres of
rural land should be considered. Secondary and cumulative impacts should also be evaluated for
the other rural areas that subsequently will be affected by the extension of utilities. The
urbanization of rural areas results in the direct loss of wildlife habitat as well as a decline in air
and water quality that affects both humans and wildlife.
Kemersville 201 Facilities Plan 4 06/22/01
Clearinghouse # 1 l22
The information provided in the plan is limited in scope and not sufficient for our staff to make
definite recommendations or conclusions concerning the project and potential impacts to the area
and the watershed. The plan does not provide enough detail to show specific locations for the
utility line crossings. For example, the location of the Lower Abbotts Creek pumping station has
been shown to be on the south side of Watkins Ford Road in Forsyth County although planning
statements have indicated that it will be situated on the north side of the road in the annexed area.
We believe that an Enviromnental Impact Statement (EIS) is appropriate as existing land uses
will be significantly changed, public funds are involved, and significant impacts to fish and
wildlife habitats are likely to occur as a result of the project. An EIS should discuss secondary
and cumulative impacts from urban growth that the utility lines will facilitate. It should also
discuss how Kemersville and Forsyth County plan to mitigate for those impacts.
In conclusion, we are unable to concur with a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the
project as described, due the fact that only direct impacts from sewer line construction have-been
evaluated. Anticipated secondary and cumulative impacts should be considered, as major
residential developments, industrial parks, new schools, and traffic improvements will
significantly change rural lands and habitats. It is probable that we could concur with
Alternative A without an EIS.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any questions
regarding these comments, please contact me at 919-733-3633 extension 283.
Literature cited:
Sommers, A.B., Bridle, K.A., Herman, D.W., Nelson, A.B. 2000. The Restoration and
Management of Small Wetlands of the Mountains & Piedmont in the Southeast: A
Manual Emphasizing Endangered & Threatened Species Habitat with a Focus on Bog
Turtles. Watershed Science and Wetland Science Institutes of the Natural Resource
Conservation Service
Attachment
Kernersville 201 Facilities Plan
Clearinghouse # 1122
Attachment
06/22/01
Utility Line and Sewer Line Avoidance and Minimization Recommendations
Measures to avoid or minimize impacts to sensitive resources, including wetlands, should
be implemented during all phases of construction associated with the area. Where impacts to
wetlands (and waters) are unavoidable, we will recommend mitigation of the losses. In addition
to providing wildlife habitat, wetland areas perform the important functions of flood control and
water quality protection. Whenever possible, utility lines should be placed along existing rights-
of-way along roads and previously impacted corridors. Pumping may be economically feasible
where direct or secondary impacts can be avoided in sensitive habitats. To avoid or minimize
stream and wetland impacts during constriction of utility lines, we offer the following
generalized recommendations that should be incorporated into project plans:
1) Construction corridors should be no wider than absolutely necessary. The 401
certification for Nationwide 12 stipulates that wetland construction corridors are not to
exceed 40 feet and permanent maintained corridors are not to exceed 10 feet except at
access points. The NC division of Water Quality's 401 Certification for utility lines
should be followed specifically for all jurisdictional impacts.
2) Where crossings are necessary, sewer lines should cross streams at right angles to
minimize impacts to riparian areas. Disturbed stream banks and wetlands must be
restored to original contours and revegetated with native plant materials such as silky
dogwood (Corpus amonum), silky willow (Salix sericea) and hazel alder (Alms
serrulata). Riprap may be used to stabilize the bank in the area of the ordinary high
water stage and vegetation (bioengineering) should be used above this stage. Aquatic life
passage must not be hindered during low flows upon project completion. Directional
boring is the preferred method of crossing jurisdictional waters and wetlands.
3) Utility lines crossing streams should be buried in the stream bottom or attached to
existing bridges to maintain fish movement upstream and downstream and prevent debris
from collecting at the pipe and causing a hydrologic change. We do not recommend
installing piers in a stream channel to support a sewer line.
4) If concrete will be used, work must be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact stream water. This will lessen the chance of altering the stream's water chemistry
and causing a fish kill.
5) An undisturbed buffer zone should be left between streams and all construction. We
prefer a buffer zone of at least 100 feet to control sedimentation into streams, provide
shade, and maintain a travel corridor for wildlife. Buffers should also be left along
intermittent drains or streams. Following floodplain- edge contours with utility lines is
preferable to following the riparian zones and streams.
G Kernersville 201 Facilities Plan 6 06/22/01
Clearinghouse # 1122
6) Temporarily disturbed wetlands should be reseeded with annual small grains appropriate
for the season (e.g. oats, millet, rye, wheat, annual lespedeza or rye grass) and be allowed
to revert to native natural wetland vegetation.
7) A portion of the upland right-of-way (minimum of one acre) should be planted with VA-
70 lespedeza, Korean lespedeza, Ladino clover, and/or partridge pea to provide food and
additional habitat for wildlife.
8) Slash and/or large trees available from corridor construction through forested and stream
corridors should be placed along the permanent right-of-way in the form of brush piles
and downed logs to provide cover and nesting habitat for wildlife.
9) If necessary, ROW areas should be mowed not more than once every 2-3 years. Mowing
should not occur between April I through September 30 in order to avoid disturbing
wildlife utilizing the project corridor during the critical stages of nesting and rearing of
young.
10) Stringent erosion control measures should be implemented where soil is disturbed and
maintained until project completion.
l 1) Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within
5 to 10 days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control. We
prefer a "seed as you go" strategy rather than allowing a large area to remain bare.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
June 5, 2001
MEMORANDUM
TO: Larry Coble
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
FROM: Steve Mauney
Environmental Engineer
SUBJECT: Town of Kemersville
201 AMDT. - Forsyth County
The subject amendment to the 201 plan evaluates the options for providing sewer service to areas
south of Kemersville along Interstate 40 and extending along the Abbotts Creek Basin down to US
Highway 311 (Alternative B). There is an Alternative A which does not include the southern (lower)
part of the Abbotts Creek Basin (3,750 acres) that is downstream from the current pump station.
A large development (932 acres) was recently annexed by Kernersville in this lower part of the
Abbotts Creek Basin., which will shift out attention to Alternative B.
Alternative B allows for the replacement of two (2) pump stations (Deep River & Abbotts Creek)
with modern larger capacity stations. These stations allow for growth in two watershed areas that
are feeling development pressure from the construction of the new section of I-40 in the mid 90's.
i
While some secondary imparts will occur in this project area, it is felt that either Option 1 or 2 of
Alternative B would allow for ordinary growth in these service areas.
cc: Central Files
W SRO
B
WETLANDS AND WATERS COMMENTS
Proceeding with pre-application meetings for acquiring the USACOE 404 permit and the DWQ 401
certification for this project prior to completing the environmental review would be advantageous. Although no
permits or certifications can be issued until the environmental document is completed, the 404/401 pre-
application process should provide additional insights into the project and avoidance measures. This would
likely speed up the 404/401 review process.
The delineation of the wetland/waters impacts accomplished should be verified by the USACOE for both
the acres of jurisdictional wetlands and jurisdictional Iinear footage of waters during this review. It is suggested
that during the 404/401 review that site visits be coordinated so that USACOE and DWQ field personnel, water
supply and stormwater administrators, and other interested parties can be present. Both stream and wetland
mitigation will likely be required for impacts which cannot be avoided. High value bottomland hardwood
wetlands have been found and avoided during permitting and certifications for other 404/401 impacts in the
general area. Water supply (maintaining current quality) issues will also require due diligence and buffer
protection. Variances and/or mitigation requirements and/or other actions may be necessary for both.
Maximizing mitigation efforts within the same subbasin where the impacts occur will be paramount due to the
above issues, if required. Minimizing stream and wetland crossings plus providing perpendicular stream
crossings should help avoid mitigation.
Bioengineering techniques and stream design criteria should be utilized for stream protection,
relocations, and restorations as per fluvial morphology and restoration principles developed by Dave Rosgen,
Luna Leopold, et. al.
It will be crucial during construction in or near wetlands and waters (by all parties contributing to this
development), that all 404/401 conditions be followed without deviation (should they be issued) as specific
activities will help reduce the cumulative impacts associated with this project. Controlling equipment operators
should be a high priority in order to prevent unpermitted impacts, unnecessary wetland losses, and to provide
the required preservation or restoration of preexisting conditions and elevations. Restoration of any construction
drained areas and 401 certified revegetation must be accomplished after construction is finished. Floodplain
pools should be avoided in order to protect any endangered or special concern species, if any.
STORMWATER PERMITS COMMENTS
Any construction activity including clearing, grading, and excavation activities resulting in the disturbance of
five (5) or more acres of total land are required to obtain a NPDES Stormwater Permit prior to be giruning these
activities. This permit requires weekly inspections of all sediment control facilities plus a record of inspection
after any rainfall event greater than 0.05 inches. Violations are finable.
Any facility that is defined as having stormwater discharges associated with industrial activity is required to
obtain a NPDES Stormwater Permit prior to beginning operation.
State stormwater permits are required for development activities draining to Outstanding Resource Waters or
activities within one mile of and draining to High Quality Waters if the activities require a Sedimentation and
Erosion Control Plan. The Stormwater Permit must be obtained prior to development activities.
North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Health
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary June 13, 2001
Linda C. Sewall, Director
MEMORANDUM
f
TO: Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
FROM: Lee G. Spencer, Regional Engineer
Public Water Supply Section
Division of Environmental Health
/jv-
SUBJECT: Town of Kernersville - 201 Facilities Plan Amendment, Project E-2837
Project Number 1122, Forsyth County
Reference is made to the above document. I have reviewed this document and offer the following
comments.
This office has concerns over the proposed huge amount of development which this proposed
sewer collection system will allow in two relatively small water supply watersheds. The two water
supply watersheds in question are West Fork Deep River and its tributaries which feed High
Point's water supply, and Abbotts Creek and its tributaries which are the main feed for
Thomasville's and Lexington's water supplies. The sewer project itself will have minimal adverse
affects on water quality, but the secondary impacts of this project will create tremendous
amounts of earth disturbance, pollution sources, and subsequent impervious areas in the
watersheds. As such, an EIS should probably be required.
As an example of what will only worsen water quality, consider what is already happening in the
other portion of the City of High Point's water supply watershed. The City of High Point is
currently experiencing record poor raw water quality in its water supply lakes due primarily to
the widening of I-40, and nearby urban development. Numerous algaes, continuous turbidity,
and nitrates have all been at record high levels this year.
The Abbotts Creek water supply watershed is WS-III, not WS-IV, and as such should receive
added scrutiny of proposed development. I have observed first hand where several hundred feet
of a stream in this watershed (under local program protection) has been straight channeled and
repeatedly sprayed with herbicide. Areas upstream and downstream of this industrial
development appear to have healthy vegetative stream buffers within the flood plain including
some wetlands.
At a minimum, stringent stream buffers should be required and enforced on all jurisdictional
waters in the watersheds to be served by this proposed sewer collection system. A qualified
consultant or the US COE should delineate all jurisdictional waters, including intermittent and
perineal streams. This up front delineation should assist Kernersville in protecting appropriate
stream buffers, and aid in future permitting.
cc: Linda C. Sewall, Director, Division of Environmental Health
Jessica G. Miles, Chief, Public Water Supply Section
Jerry Perkins, y Section
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY \ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER -50% RECYCLED/ 10% POST CONSUMER PAPER
I '.9
State of North Carolina
NCDEMR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
Reviewing Office: ws P_o
Project Number: 112- Z. Due Date: /Z./
After review of this project it has been determined that the DENR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in order for this project
to comply with North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of this form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Regional Office.

61i
&
V
D
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS Normal Process Time
(Statutory Time Limit)
Permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of construction 30 days
facilities, sewer system extensions & sewer systems contracts. On-site inspection. Post-application technical conference usual. (90 days)
not discharging into state surface waters.
NPDES-permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection preapplication
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to construct wastewater treatment 90 - 120 days
discoing into state surface waters. facility-granted after NPDES. Reply time, 30 days after receipt of plans or issue (N/A)
of NPDES permit-whichever is later.
Water Use Permit Preapplication technical conference usually necessary 30 days
(N/A)
Well Construction Permit Complete application must be received and permit issued prior to the 7 days
installation of a well. (15 days)
Dredge and Fill Permit Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property owner. 55 days
On-site inspection. Preapplication conference usual. Filling may require Easement (90 days)
to Fill from N.C.Department of Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement
facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15 A NCAC N/A 60 days
(2Q.0100, 2Q.0300, 2 H.0600)
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
C ?' ?" v•<N ?S
must be in compliance with 15 A NCAC 2D.1900
Demolition or renovations of structures containing ??'l Gt r vN{ Mw
asbestos material must be in compliance with
60 days
15 A NCAC 2D.1110 (a) (1) which requires notification N/A (90 days)
and removal prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos
Control Group 919-733-0820.
Complex Source Permit required under 15 A NCAC
2D.0800
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion & sedimentation
20 days
control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Section) at least 30
3 days before beginning activity. A fee of $40 for the first acre or any part of an acre. (30 days)
El l The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referenced Local Ordinance. 30 days
Mining Permit On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with DENR. Bond amount varies with
type mine and number of acres of affected land. Any are mined greater than 30 days
one acre must be permitted. The appropriate bond must be received before (60 days)
the permit can be issued.
North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources if permit exceeds 4 days 1 day
(N/A)
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit-22 counties On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources required `if more than five 1 day
in coastal N.C..with organic soils. acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections should be requested (N/A)
at least ten days before actual burn is planned.`
Oil Refining Facilities N/A go- 120 days

i (N/A)
Dam Safety Permit If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction. Applicant
must hire N.C.qualified engineer to: prepare plans, inspect construction, certify
construction is according to DENR approved plans. May also require permit under
mosquito control program, and a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers. 30 days
An inspection of site is necessary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum (60 days)
fee of 5200.00 must accompany the application. An additional processing fee
based on a percentage or the total project cost will be required upon completion.
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS Normal Process Time

Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well
File surety bond of $5,000 with DENR running to State of N.C.conditional that any (Statutory Time Limit)
well opened by drill operator shall, upon abandonment, be plugged according 1
days
to DENR rules and regulations. (
(N/A)
Geophysical Exploration Permit Application filed with DENR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit. Application 10 days
by letter. No standard application form. (N/A)
State Lakes Construction Permit Application fees based on structure size is charged. Must include descriptions
& drawings of structure & proof of ownership of riparian property 15 days -20
. (N/A)

401 Water Quality Certification
N/A
S5 days
(130 days)
CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
$250.00 fee must accompany application 60 days
030 days)
CAMA Permit for MINOR development $50.00 fee must accompany application
22 days
(25 days)
Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area. If any monument needs to be moved or destroyed, please notify:
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687 Raleigh, N.C.27611
Abandonment of anywells, if required must be in accordance with Title 15A.Subchapter 2C.0100.
J
jNotification of the proper regional office is requested if `orphan` underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during any excavation operation.

Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H 1000 (Coastal Stormwater Rules) is required
. 45 days
(N/A)
Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority)
' ?=o•-s.JE-r^ (;c??i? ?,? ?. ?-??-?Lr?z s p?-l,? 1,tcts ct t,,4-I?w,? c- ?j '-r „; S?t?< 1? i... ?; ..-
1? tr r L c<< i ?S vue ; t J ?i t" Fes, s J vt, (.o . `lu c cz S(?t"?4U <; s k,,v fc:
7 - 80eo .
'? Y3 v2 3 i ?? o 1
3 M*t L Q -
?
1G14 '710
-C7.2dN?TC?,?'t?.?
REGIONAL OFFICES
+ Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
? Asheville Regional Office ? Mooresville Regional Office ? Wilmington Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place 919 North Main Street 127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Asheville, N.C. 28801 Mooresville, N.C.28115
j [phone] Wilmington, N.C.28405
[phone] [phone]
? Fayetteville Regional Office ? Raleigh Regional Office ? Winston-Salem Regional Office
225 Green Street, Suite 714 3800 Barrett Drive, P.O. Box 27687 585 Waughtown Street
Fayetteville, N.C. 28301 Raleigh, N.C.27611 Winston-Salem, N.C.27107
[phone] [phone] [phone]
? Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, N.C.27889
[phone]
Division of Air Quality
June 5, 2001
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
FROM: Alan Klimek, Director
? fir(
SUBJECT: Project No. 1122
Town of Kernersville
201 Facilities Plan Amendment
Forsyth County
The Division of Air Quality has reviewed the proposed project to provide a wastewater
collection system for southeastern Forsyth County within the Deep River and Abbotts
Creek Basins. The recommended improvements include installation of force mains and
sewer lines and construction of new pump stations.
If improvements or construction at the wastewater treatment plant include installation of
particulate sources such as lime silos, boilers, emergency generators or peak-shaving
generators, then an air permit may be required.
Additionally, the contractors constructing the components of the wastewater system
should take care to comply with open burning provisions during land clearing. Adequate
wetting, reseeding and covering of disturbed areas should be utilized during earthmoving
or demolition operations to mitigate any adverse impact from fugitive dust emissions.
If there are any questions regarding air permitting requirements for this facility, Mr.
Myron Whitley, Winston-Salem Regional Air Quality Supervisor, should be contacted at
[phone].
Should you require further information in this regard, please advise.
c: Connie Washburn

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Cou ty

t
F1
The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications or all water system

E] The soil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding

E] The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated

El if existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND Project Number
NATURAL RESOURCES -? //0
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
Type o Project
Project Name Il Zvi X-,!
improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the
award of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C
.0300et. seq.). For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919)
733-2321.
? This project will be classified as anon-community public water supply and must comply
with state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the
applicant should contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
? If this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure of feet of
adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfish
sanitation program, the applicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Section at (252)
726-6827.
problem. For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the
applicant should contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at-[phone].
structures, a extensive rodent control program maybe necessary in order to prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent areas. For information concerning rodent control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management Section at
[phone].
? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their
requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC 18A. 1900 et.
sep.). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods,
contact the On-Site Wastewater Section at [phone].
? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding the
sanitary facilities required for this project.
relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water
Supply Section, Technical Services Branch, 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27699-1634, [phone].
For Regional and Central Office comments, see the reverse side of this form.
t???? ?? xv
Reviewer Section/Branch Date
I yr Clvvlt-iUNMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES Project Number
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ? 2 z
Co Nty
inter-Agency Project Review Response
Project Nameyn.,,s
ype of Project rll&_ SL,,, e?'/??il
Comments provided by: 'l f;?l
? Regional Program Person RECEIVE n
Regional Engineer for Public Water Supply Section N. C. DE f' H N R
Central office program person
JIJ 0 S 2MI
Name: 4 LL IWins fOn- S=?ICfTZ
C7
Date: `fjGB
Telephone number: 33 7'7/ _ z1 6 i
Program within Division of Environmental Health:
:. ( Public Water'Supply
? Other, Name of Program:
i
Response (check all applicable):
?---No objection to project as proposed
? No comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Comments attached
? See comments below
Public Water Supply Section
Environmental Review Coordinator
for the
Division of Environmental Health
June 6, 2001
Dale F. Martin, Town Clerk
Town of Kernersville
P.O. Drawer 728
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728
Subject: Protest Petition
j Change in Zoning of Pine Tree Property
Zoning Docket No. K-570
Dear Ms. Martin:
Tuesday, June 5, I was handed a supplementary Protest Petition form with the signatures of
several residents who wish to have their names added to the Protest Petition previously submitted
on May 31, 2001. Although I don't know whether these names can be added at this late date,
out of courtesy to their request, I am submitting the supplementary petition form for your
consideration under UDO Section 6-2.1(0).
Mr. Rich Taylor indicated on Tuesday night that he planned to contact all petitioners to listen to
their concerns. Certainly, these residents should be included in those to be contacted.
Sincerely,
R. Edward He gecock, P.E., P.G.
5979 Hedgecock Road
Kernersville, NC 27284
[phone]
i
cc: Jeff Hatling w/o attachments
Board of Aldermen w/o attachments
attachments: Protest Petition (I Supplementary Sheet)
May 31, 2001
Dale F. Martin, Town Clerk
Town of Kernersville
P.O. Drawer 728
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728
(LAND DELIVERED)
Subject: Protest Petition
Change in Zoning of Pine Tree Property
Zoning Docket No. K-570
Dear Ms. Martin:
In accordance with UDO Sec 6-2.1(0), attached please find a petition, signed by adjacent property
owners, protesting any change in the present zoning of the Pine Tree Golf Course property located
along Teague Ln, Ogden School Rd, Hedgecock Rd, and Watkins Ford Rd. (Zoning Docket No.
K-570). The petition has been signed by adjacent property owners representing ownership of 70%
(more or less) of the approximately 11 mile long perimeter band of 100 ft width surrounding the
subject property. Accompanying this petition is a survey map of the.Pine Tree property, prepared
by Fleming Engineering, Inc., with the locations of the properties of the petitioners highlighted/
checked ( ?) thereon. Also attached is a listing of the adjacent property owners, as provided by
the Town, by block/lot number and street addresses with the properties owned by the petitioners
highlighted/checked ( ?).
This petition complies with the requirements of UDO Sec 6-2.1(0). If you believe otherwise,
please call me immediately so I can address your concerns.
Sincerely,
R. Edward Hedg cock, P.E., P.G.
5979 Hedgecock Road
i Kernersville, NC 27284
{
[phone]
cc: Jeff Hailing w/o attachments
Board of Aldermen w/o attachments
attachments: Protest Petition (26 Sheets)
Survey Map (I Sheet)
Listing by Block/Lot Number and Street Address of Property Owners (3 Sheets)
Fleming Engineering, inc.
Consulting Engineers and Zino' Surveyors
P.O. Box 6774
Greensboro, NC 27419
Phone [phone] ? Fax [phone]
Memo:
Date: 5/29/01
To: Russell RadFord, Town of Kernersuille
From: Craig Fleming
RE: Pine Hills
NI?3Ar5678,9
y 'V'd
.c
Please find attached my calculations for estimating the potential rise in floodwater from
the post-development runoff at Pine Hills.
Please be aware that these numbers were generated using some very general assumptions
and should in no way be substituted for a flood study. However, I feel that this has given
an indication of the relatively small amount of rise in the post-development stream
elevation.
y ques ions
y ques ions.
! y?/zE, - ?f J'oST /,?/?L?.°/?EvT y/?.o^'ti ?/i?E Ti2,E? CJ''?TC
i
i
_ c4z s s U-17 p s,?., rN o/,
FLrA i???-1 .. sue.
Ta
- - - ?' - CMG ?c: C ZC.Jt
A-F 4-
/ ?Ll
i
?o sT D2c . _i^, ?-? pig F . fa/u ,s /.,/>o P.?/E T.c C,?K = 5?8C?
aT_- .per .d1--tea t?f' P/N . T/L c - - Z• .s? Mi c.E S
.._(/=l ?"rlf* ?l.aoc? .. STJ,Gy ,Co•e Fo?sy ? _cou.?-ry?
j Z S U 117 i,-7 41":?7
Z?t -7,'YO O
CIVIC A
F),-4 12
0-3 no
zr,46 G Z
/ 1.11 (c
-------------------
??nSf (,A s 4c (n/ f IG N T?c? C Ta S ?? /9 Q o0

?o TG4 L Qc S T - l??/, yLu,? ?G
I Q= o/ Z. t 8 L S = A 57 C
--
_.. i.To. -.. b??"l'?.r> ._..)Z?Sc?-. IN

i
f-( crZ-,E As f ? H F-`CQ 0
W t ?C? ?" ?N ?. f clL? {?} sED PNC? . V
IC'
- Q 137 _

$ Z s?

_j FEy,14 6?sE ?ao0 c.i.?irs
j
,I
II
.I
DATUM EIZV
X330 00
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+w
5+00 '°t ! -` 6+90 7+00
4+ao r fir{ ?{
} T
K-
a
I r
_7 1.
ZIN,
May 16, 2001
Mr. Jeff Hatling, AICP
Planning Director
Town of Kernersville
P.O. Drawer 728
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728
Re: Pine Hills Development
The Ridgewood Group
Proposed Rezoning Application
Dear Jeff: -
E During the May 14, 2001 Planning Board Meeting, Mr. Craig Fleming, P.E. stated that his
preliminary analysis indicated that, for -similar hypothetical storm--events, flood- levels --post
development would exceed those prior to development -by only 0.3 ft.. Please request that Mr.
Fleming make available the assumptions and supporting information -for this preliminary
conclusion prior to the June 5 Aldermen's meeting so that the Town; the public, and the Board
of Aldermen may have this information available for timely review and consideration of potential
flood impacts.
I would appreciate a copy as soon as available. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Z? 1?kll d 4 -
R. Edward edgecock, P.E., P.G.
5979 Hedgecock Road
Kernersville, NC 27286
[phone] -
cc: R. McCaslin
Russell Radford
Ron Wooten
Board of Aldermen

May 11, 2001
Mr, Ron Wooten
Chairman of the Planning Board
Town of Kernersville
437 Drayton Park
Kernersville, NC 27284
Subject: Pine Hills Development
The Ridgewood Group
Proposed Rezoning Application
Zoning Docket No. K-570
References: April 18, 2001 correspondence Ed Hedgecock to Jeff Hatling, Planning Director,
Town of Kernersville
May 10, 2001 Planning Staff Report on Request for Rezoning
Dear Mr. Wooten:
First and foremost, I wish to-compliment the Planning Director and Planning Staff for their open
and helpful attitude, their careful consideration of preliminary public concerns regarding the .
project, and their thorough and competent Staff Report. Their extra efforts are greatly
appreciated by the surrounding community.
i
Based on my initial/brief review of the May 10, 2001 Planning Staff Report on Request for
Rezoning of the subject property, I have the following concerns:
• The May 10, 2000 Planning Staff Report, page 19, states... "There is no known flooding of
residential or non-residential structures on the proposed development site or immediately
down stream from the proposed development. "
In this regard, attached please find notarized statements from two long-term residents of
the area which confirm historical flood levels and indicate potential impacts. Please note
that the tobacco packhouse floor, referenced in Mr. Lane's letter as having been flooded
during the 1960's, is approximately 5 ft above the bridge deck on Hedgecock Rd.,
suggesting minimum historical flood levels on the lower reaches of the Pine Tree Gulf
Course tributary to Abbotts Creek have been approximately 6 ft above the existing bridge
deck or on-the-order of 14-15 ft above the existing stream level under normal flow
conditions. Mr. Matthews' letter indicates flood levels on the lower portions of Abbotts
Creek (within the southern portions' of the project boundary) to the top wire of fencing.
Mr. Ron Wooten
May 11, 2001
Page 2
Other residents have observed the bridge which crosses Abbotts Creek at Watkins Ford
Rd. topped by floodwaters. Further, it is my understanding that a local newspaper ran
articles regarding the series of 1975 spring floods of this area in March 1975, but I have
not yet retrieved archive copies. Residents are currently looking for actual old
photographs.
The potential for flooding within project boundaries and of downstream properties clearly
exists. How do these anecdotal data compare to the FEMA-predicted flood elevations?
Do the 1998 FEMA flood studies for Abbotts Creek and its tributaries take into account
the increases of impervious surface associated with projects of this size and density located
at the headwaters of the basin? Reiterating the concerns expressed in my letter of April
18, these data further suggest that flood -impact studies should be performed as a
condition of rezoning.
For larger sites of more than 300 acres, such as this, the Town has jurisdictional
authority and implied responsibility for these actions per Chapter B, Article II, Section C
(3)(b)(ii)[D] ofthe UDO, Supplementary District Requirements, MU-SDistrictApplication,
Site Plan_ Requirements= and Procedure, Larger Sites and via -municipal stormwater
permitting/watershed protection ordinances, specifically Sections 5-5.2(E)(1) and (F) of
the Town's Watershed Protection Ordinance. Further, as stated on page 6 of the Staff
Report... "During the First Phase (of the Special Use District two phase rezoning petition)
the Board of Aldermen may determine the uses, public improvements needs and special
conditions that would protect the public health, safety and welfare of existing and future
residents."
Any flood impact studies should identify the design criteria (design/emergency storm
frequency and duration) utilized to model and/or mitigate flood potential along the
Hedgecock Rd., Teague Ln., Watkins Ford Rd. stream corridor(s). As possible, any
predictive flood modeling should be "calibrated" to the known baseline conditions
(precipitation events, actual flood levels, and percent woodland and impervious surface)
of the site prior to development during the 1960's and 1970's, so that the impacts of the
proposed increased impervious surface area can be accurately evaluated for similar
precipitation events and under design storm conditions. Rainfall records are available
from the Piedmont International Airport back to 1931. These records may assist in the
estimation of the severity/duration and predicted recurrence interval of the precipitation
events triggering the 1960's and 1970's floods. Assumptions regarding location and
composition of proposed impervious surfaces relative to existing conditions, runoff before
and after construction, and the location(s), number(s), size(s), and design storm capacities
of either in-stream or conventional stormwater control ponds should be identified.
Mr. Ron Wooten
May 11, 2001
Page 3
Further, the intended use/status and risk classification of the existing dams should be
noted. Whether the dams will be reclassified as high hazard, upgraded, or removed
should be determined, so that environmental impacts can be evaluated.
The public health and safety issues related to risk of breach or failure of the existing dams
also merit the most careful consideration and technical evaluation.
As stated on page 33, Condition 6, of the Staff Rezoning and Special Use Permit Conditions
Recommendations... "The conservation area shall be a minimum 216 acres. It shall include
the entire FEMA 100 year flood zone as surveyed by elevation and required stream buffers
for USGS identified perennial streams (blue line streams)."
The figure of page 21 of the Staff Report identifies the extent of the FEMA 100 year flood
zone versus the 100 year flood zone surveyed by elevation. However, the figure of page
7 of the Staff Report indicates the conservation area will include only the FEMA flood
zone along the USGS solid blue line streams and the onsite portion of the perennial stream
near Glennview Drive, not the entire FEMA surveyed flood zone shown on page 21,
which also includes the perennial stream near Loradale Drive. As noted on the figure on
page 17 of the Staff Report, stream buffers will be required only along the USGS solid _
blue line streams.
A copy of a portion of the USGS topographic sheet showing the general project area is
attached. Streams proposed to have protected buffers (1969 USGS solid blue line streams)
per the Staff Report and the minimum requirements of the Town's Watershed Protection
Ordinance (high density option) and these perennial/ intermittent streams ("waters of the
State" per the Staff Report) which would be left unprotected (without protective buffers)
under the proposed plans are identified.
Recent photographs (taken on May 6, 2001 to represent the recent dry period) of several
of the streams are attached. The approximate locations of the photographs are shown on
the topographic sheet. Photographs 1 and 2 show wetlands fed by existing springs and by
perennial streams which would be "unprotected", or without buffers. Photographs 3-6
show several of the secondary/tertiary order perennial streams which would similarly be
unprotected.
Clearly, the Pine Tree Golf Course tributary to Abbotts Creek, and in turn, Abbotts
Creek, cannot be protected from the direct runoff of silt and contaminants from the
westernmost areas of development if vegetative stream buffers are not required on all these
perennial streams/watercourses.
Mr. Ron Wooten
May 11, 2001
Page 4
The attached May 08, 2001 letter from the City of Lexington further emphasizes the need
and public obligation of the Town of Kernersville to mitigate runoff/contaminant impacts
to all streams, since the drinking water supplies of about 40,000 Davidson County
residents are at risk.
Because of the critical nature of the existing water supply to Lexington/Thomasville and
the potential negative impact of this project on the water quality of the Abbotts Creek
Basin, consideration should be given to requiring special conditions for rezoning under
Section C (3)(b)(ii)[D] of the UDO and Sections 5-5.2(E)(1) and (F) of the Town's
j
Watershed Protection Ordinance, as part of the First Phase of the rezoning process. The
special conditions should attempt to partially mitigate the cutting of several hundred acres
of trees (which reduce runoff and are protective of streams and habitat) and their
replacement with impervious surfaces such as roof tops and asphalt pavement by requiring
buffers on all streams. The buffers would have the secondary benefit of providing
interconnected habitat and allow natural access, or wildlife corridors, to adjacent forested
areas.
The -special conditions could reasonably- include 100 ft minimum-width protected
vegetative buffers, etc. with the more stringent application to all watercourses, including
existing intermittent springs/ streams, all perennial streams, lakes, ponds, and wetlands
(where more protective than existing State and Federal regulations), similar to those in
effect in the Deep River Basin.
For a project of this size, minimal adherence to existing regulations and ordinances may
be inadequate protection of water quality in the Abbotts Creek Basin. Further, the overall
cumulative environmental impacts of a project of this complexity and the precedents which
may be set cannot adequately be evaluated within the structure of a multiphase approval
over a period of years with piecemeal foreknowledge of the project's stormwater controls
and stream buffers. These impacts should be evaluated prior to initial zoning approval.
First Phase zoning approval should be subject to appropriate special conditions, as
indicated by the potential negative impacts and consistent with the projects's extraordinary
size and critical location at the headwaters of Abbotts Creek.
The project has the potential to be a flagship project for Kernersville and the Triad. Coupled with
the public/private benefit, there exists an opportunity to protect streams, springs, and habitat and .
to minimize adverse impacts to the drinking water supplies of Lexington and Thomasville without
undue economic impact to the developer, nor the Town. These options should be thoroughly
explored, with appropriate public, professional, and regulatory input.
Mr. Ron Wooten
May 11, 2001
Page 5
The Planning Staff's recommendation was completed and made available to the Planning Board
and the public Thursday, May 10, 2001, two working days prior to the May 14, 2000 Planning
Board Meeting. For a 'fz acre parcel, or even a 10 acre site, this may allow an adequate review
period to serve the interests of the Planning Board and the public. However, for a project of
nearly 950 acres at the headwaters of the Abbotts Creek Basin, which will have significant, if not
major impacts on the future growth and economy of Kernersville, if not the Triad region, this
short time period is inadequate for public review and comment. Inadequate time is available both
for the Planning Staff and Planning Board to consider and research any citizen comments and
input which may not have been available and therefore not considered in the original Planning
Staff Report and for the public to review/comment on the significant risks and economic potential
presented by the project and not synthesized into my reasonably digestible form until the May 10
availability of the Planning Staff Report.
I thereby request that, after receipt of initial public reaction and comment at the May 14 Planning
Board meeting, a supplementary or extended 30-45 day public review period of the project be
provided to allow related staff recommendations, and any appropriate revisions thereto, to be
thoroughly evaluated by the Planning Board and the general public. I further request that the
Planning Board table any decisions regarding rezoning of the project until the extended public
-review period is complete and all comments submitted for final Planning-Board consideration.
The residents of the Community appreciate your careful consideration of these matters.
Sincerely,
R. Edward dgecock, P.E., P.G.
5979 Hedgecock Road
Kernersville, NC 27286
[phone]
cc w/ attachments
Planning Board Members
Mr. Jeff Hatling, AICP
Mr. Russell Radford, P.E.
Mr. Milt Rhodes, NC DENR
Mr. Richard L. Thomas, Mayor,
City of Lexington
Mr. Ira C. Hedgecock
p CAfc
l
OF A
8513,(=
y pG
??RD?t E,?l
/` f
May 8, 2001
Mr. Jeff Hatling, AICP
Planning Director
Town of Kernersville
P.O. Drawer 728
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728
Re: Pine Hills Development
Historical Flooding of Non-Residential Structures
Dear Jeff:
During the 1960's, I personally witnessed floodwater near the bridge crossing a tributary of
Abbott's Creek at the eastern end of Hedgecock Road to a height of approximately 1 ft. above
the basement floor level of the existing tobacco packhouse located adjacent to Hedgecock Road
and just to the east of my residence at 5983 Hedgecock Road, Kernersville, North Carolina. ThQ.
flooding required removal of the stored tobacco -to a safer location
Sincerely,
Joh esley Lane
5983 Hedgecock Road
Kernersville, North Carolina 27284
Before me personally appearedh u 6\,e known to me to be the person
described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledge to and before me that
executed said instrument for the purposes therein expressed.
WITNESS my hand and of is eal, this day of _`?o? A.D., 2001.
Notary Public
My r?,rs xpires `?-Zh - Z ?Z \
-tr COUNTY OF
May 8, 2001
Mr. Jeff Hatling, AICP
Planning Director
Town of Kernersville
P.O. Drawer 728
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728
Re: Pine Hills Development
Historical Flooding of Non-Residential Structures
Dear Jeff:
During the 1960's and 1970's, I have personally witnessed floodwaters along Abbott's Creek to
the elevation of the top wire of the fencing located on the eastern side of Teague Lane and across
from my residence at 1910 Teague Lane, Kernersville, North Carolina.
Sincerely, -
David Matthews
1910 Teague Lane
Kernersville, North Carolina 27284
Before me personally appeared own to me to be the person
described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledge to and before me that
11
e?c ?ted said instrument for the purposes therein expressed.
?a•y 1' 01 !'
Y
WITNESS my hand and official se4l, this /0 day of A,,4 A.D., 2001.
Notary Public lIz+
My Commission expires ?1CO. 2- NOTARY PIJsj,c
OFFICIAL SEL
STATE of ?a,eoCOUNTY OF s
is
FORSYTH COUNTY, tk
My Cortirnissidn Egiie§
A.
THE CITY OF LEXINGTON
NORTH CAROLINA
CAttoy
"GROWING WITH THE PIEDMONT"
OFFICE OF THE
MAYOR
May 8, 2001
Post-It* Fax Noto 7871 Date s 8 p oayea? fl
TO Ft S
MayOC Larry Brown ColDev?. cO? ? S
Town of Kernersville P„0„e r Ph°„e alS /o
P.O. Box 728 Fax, Fa`' X43- 3
Keraersville, NC 27285-0728 3 ~ ?'
Ile: Pine Hills Development
bnpact on the Watershed of Lake Thom-A-Lex
Dear Mayor Brown:
The City of Lexington is very concerned about the impact of the proposed Pine Hills Development
on Lake Thom-A-Lex. If my information is correct, this development will disturb almost 1 and 1/2
square miles of a watershed which covers only 70 square-miles.
Lake Thom-A-L:ex is the :sole water "supply for more than 40,000 people in= Davidson County. A
development of this size will have an initial negative impact on the lake through increased sediment
loading and will decrease the lake's yield long term through degrading the watershed.
In 1999, the Cities of Lexington and Thomasville-and Davidson County endorsed a letter which
expressed our concerns about development of this watershed. These concerns remain the same.. I
am attaching a copy of the letter for your reference.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Richard L. Thomas, Mayor
City of Lexington
Attachment
cc: Hubert Leonard, City of Thomasville Mayor
Roger Spach, Water Resources Superintendent
Rick Austin, Public Works Director
22 WEST CENTER STREET • LEXINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 27292 • PH. 336-248-3910 • FAX [phone]
cY4 87-2-7
THE CITY OF LEXINGTON s
NORTH y CAROLINA
op,?
'f1 CAa?
"SERVING THE COMMUNITY SINCE 1828 "
28 WEST CENTER STREET August 26, 1999 TELEPHONE [phone]
LEXINGTON, NC 27292
Mr. Fred Luce
City-County Planning Board
P.O. Box 2511
Winston Salem, N.C. 27107
Re: Draft Legacy Comprehensive Plan for Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Luce:
On behalf of the Cities of Lexington and Thomasville and Davidson County, we would like to
express our concerns on the above plan. This plan designates the Lake Thom-A-Lex watershed
as one of the growth areas in Forsyth County. This area was previously designated for farm land
and similar uses. _
Lake Thom-A-Lex is the water supply lake for the Cities of Lexington and Thomasville,
representing more than 40,000 people in Davidson County with their homes and jobs. Since its
consiruction in 1957, its siltation has, filled- in about 201/o of the lake. Irresponsible development
in the watershed will accelerate this sedimentation and reduce the iluantity and quality of the
water received by the two cities.
We, the Cities of Lexington and Thomasville and Davidson County, wish to express our
concerns that the following be maintained in the watersheds represented:
1. Enforcement of their existing minimum water supply watershed rules adopted by the
State of North Carolina-
2. Maintaining natural vegetative buffers along streams versus grassed buffers.
About 27% of the Lake Thom-A-Lex watershed is in Forsyth County. Accelerated growth in this
watershed will impact Lake Thom-A-Lex. Costs for dredging the lake and for treating a
deteriorated water supply will be enormous. These can be significantly reduced and postponed
by responsible growth-
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Richard Thomas -'
Mayor, Lexington
on Truell Larry Potts
Mayor, Tbom Chairman, County
Commission
LIMITED EXTENT OF PROTECTED VEGETATIVE STREAM BUFFERS
PINE HILLS DEVELOPMENT
REFERENCES' y
BASE FROM 1969 USGS KERNERSVILLE, ,;a 13ces r \
• . Z.rosgroads -
NC TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE (PHOTO-
REVISED 1987)
PERENNIALANTERMITTENT STREAMS AND
WETLANDS FROM PRELIMINARY WETLANDS :' 1, ?•
SURVEY OF PINE TREE GOLF COURSE BY
FLEMING ENGINEERING DATED MAY 05, 2000
. , z:. .'-- y• / ? ? 5". Qzc - ,rte, ?- „?.
i
1-40
i
}
a 4-
j ?'"Let' ? r
n \
looo
I" 1 kv. Y ?? \N ? / -v ?11
-AW
x r -?.\
962._,'\
i:h
5J
- ?? 7 l y 1000 0 2000 3000
i
SCALE IN FEET
i -Winn (•rus? ?
EXPLANATION
i USGS SOLID BLUE LINE
WATER COURSE - PROTECTED
OTHER PERENNIAL AND
d / INTERMITTENT STREAMS -
UNPROTECTED
I.
WETLANDS AND EXISTING
PONDS/LAKES
US'311 /??/ - O
5 APPROXIMATE LOCATION
OF PHOTOGRAPH
Photograph 2: General Extent of
Wetlands Area of
Photograph I
Photograph l: Jurisdictional Wetlands Area as Defined by Preliminary Wetlands Survey
Photograph 3: Perennial Stream -
Unprotected by
Proposed Vegetative
Stream Buffers
Photograph 4: Perennial Stream -
Unprotected by
Proposed Vegetative
Stream Buffers

a+
06
Photograph 5: Perennial Stream -Unprotected
by Proposed Vegetative Stream
Buffers

,v
u

?A

•A"
TI
?? Ir
-
?
.
k
T. i
._ .C

? l
.
`Y

Photograph 6: Perennial Stream
Unprotected by
Proposed Vegetative
Stream Buffers

?y
t
?
•
wY
• 1?jUf?n1
.
?^
?.,
e.
1
? f -• ? I?c
i ?f??r
r
`? ?
?
1
? '}FB r" Iwo _.JyjL
V.L ?
• . ?
1 ..
t
I..
?{V r
? k`7v r .s ?
L? 54q• ? 43

P"
0
DlY1SiOn of Water ualit
Water Quality Planning Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 77699-1617
FAQ:: [phone]
DATE: ? l U f
ff
?`?' SAX NUMBER: 3 TO: FROM

•i
Tn • I CC- t7T Tn hT FIPW 1CQCCT 1F,Tf, XP4 11 Tel-nn A-4IHM Am
PHONE NUMBER: [phone] extension:
including this shcct):_?? Q
NO. OF PAGES
Y?
Fax Message From=
May 14 '01 1432
Name: DIV WATER QUALITY
Fax Number= 9197155637
NCDENR - DIV OF WATER Planning Branch

Michael F. Easley
OF vvn1FR Governor
?OZ OG w?lliam G. Ross Jr.
r popartrnent of environment and Natural Resources
> Koff T. Stevens
O omrion of water ouolity
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 14: 2001
TO: Russell Radford, Town of Kernersville
FROM: Milt Rhodes, Watershed Protection Program
RE: Pine Hills Rezoning Report Comments
site
p of Spresetaffs C ity with
cr the Thank you Russell for allowing me honk el at thPlanning
the
think the
of th
in newly annexed Kern sive 1
City grow in a exciting and positive direction. ltake this opportunity totpo nt oult a fewisconcernproject have with the concerned with some challenges and would
project.
After reading through the Planning Report put together by staff with the City, t have identified veral
the own
_that may need further discussion, could benefit from further discussion, or provide opportu
my want to act on prior to making its decision in the rezoning request.
it I think that the planning leadership has done an excellent job in putting this project together:--l am not
surea if adequate time has been given to investigating the secondary and cumulative effects to the water
sur o anion it is important to
supply watershed that will accompany this project ts of the development that may impact oe watershed
fdocument and provide conditions on the compo KemersVille part prior to the first site plan review procedure. While the e MU S zoning categorydoes
I th nkrthe best opportunity
procedure with regard to projects that ace requesting the for establishing an environmentally sound and protective land management ffoun daati Inohe initi th s to initial
zoning designation in the form of special conditions that must
and cause?unnrecesented essary icomplin the thatphascoulde of
On projects of this scale, revising a final l
rezoning process. may take considerable resources providing this information up
avoided by addressing those issues during the first phase of the rezoning.
front allows a developer to have a better idea as to what they are dealing with and l believe ultimately lead
to a more efficient development process-that
the The following comments address issues identified in the report of the zonPla ring 13 and for the City pled ing Kemersville may want to consider prior to issuing t decision sections of the report and will respond to each point individually. The excerpted sections are in italics, my
comments follow.
i
rt>cess is a Special Use District Two Phase rezoning petition. During a Two Phase Special U
acceptable
with
1. This rezoning p
cond petition the Board of Aldermen considers 9h nPlanning Boardsfo?netview and approval rons at An the time the
Final Development Plan is submitted to
developer has designed the specific site plan. During the al First Phase the oard of Aldermen Condit one that would pro act the m c publ
determine the uses, public improvements needs and spa
health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents. During the Second Phase the Planning
1617 Mail Service Gentor Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Division of Water Quality
customer service
(gig) 733-7015
1-877-623-6748
httDJ/www.enr-stato.nc.us _
7n a CC - hT Tn nT 6PW )CQCCT)CTFtxPa 1.I T-lHnn A-111-IM nTn
pubt c h a4 hr sem6rits afety and welfare.d
are met Board reviews a Final Develo d othc rroatson. ble resqu that rthoard AuralderMan
the Planning Boom may
The first phase of the two-phase zoning petition allows for the Board of Alderman to determine special
conditions needed to protect the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents. This provides
the opportunity to address the environmental issues. The second phase is intended to review the 'final" seems development plan. BY then it may be to
have the conditions lddrawn up prior to the actual and Ifo mal s to
efficient to late
me that it would much
design being under taken. For a project of this scale, reconfiguring a site plan could cost a lot o money.
2. 'Depending upon the size, intensity, and/or complexity of the proposal, the Director of Planning may
require the petitionlimited to, analysis of traffic impacts, assist of public n water and sewer, I an d
including, but not
capacity of schools. As warranted, staff. may also recommend certain on-site or off-site infrastructure
improvements or other mitigation measures as conditions for zoning approval." ects This project is not like smaller projects that may not require the same leve` inves h tigati work be rig doneis
scale should be reviewed thoroughly by a variety of regulatory agencies
prior to e se . regulatory This would ensure that all
parties and moneVefdor tmight eliminate snas and slow downs due he City as well asthe Bevel pm nt team. tl would encourage
restrictions saving both time e Y
the use of the State ty fo sclo pin Act procedure for major work to be done prior to actual is to designsandhengineering
provides an opportunity for detailed P 9 w
work being started. In large public projects that undergo a State Environmental Policy Act review,
undertaking a scoping procedure with agencies involved with the regulatory review of a project can _ ana significantly improve the overall efficiency. I_encourage the
Comm ssit to Parks and Recreation, and he e
- City to contact state agencies such as the Wildlife Resou ew cumulative effects to habitat and water
Division of Water Quality to investigate potential secondary and quality that will be associated with this project.
3 At build-out, the estimated population within the development
the will be between s 2,745 proposed housing 6/31 These
numbers are based on a 2 to 2.3 person per housing
These figures seem low. Many limes, it is better to over estimate than under estimate.
4. 'Recognize that Kernersville is at the headwaters of streams that provide water supply to the cities of
High Point, Thomasville, Lexington, Winston-Salem and Greensboro. Plan carefully from a regional
standpoint to help protect these watersheds as Kernersvillo continue to grow and develop.' Page 6
An extremely important issue is the protection of headwater streams flowing into water supplies. The
headwater streams support the highest diversity of wildlife and provide the initial filtering benefits for all
waters in the hydrologic system. Many times headwater streams are not identified as perennial streams on d on those USGS topographic buffer eesmaps.
icp ons, These strems if n
do st still exist and provide an important t unction' to etheoecosy tem
restrictions,
protective ive buffer
I recommend taking this opportunity to work with the local governments downstream from this site that use tion
plan as
suggested these water resources on developing an Abbotts C to protect the mapn st ecm of AbbotLs Creek a dlthehe
Legacy Plan for Forsyth County. This is an opportunity
headwaters of the entire watershed. These opportunities do not exist very often. With this project being as
large as it is, most of the headwater streams for Abbots Creek tall within the bounds of the project area.
rn•J
h('•t,T Tn hT 6PM
ICOCCT IC?Ta• xPJ I I T1F )n A7I14M nTn
several large tracts of land?in agricultural use commissioners within
5. 'The prase rf resew g open space. There are
preserving
as a method
the it seems unlikely that preserving these agricultural lands would
quality study area (ETJ).
improve ve the the quality of life. It is more likely to raise the cost of remaining undeveloped land, to cause
conflicts with urban and rural agricultural uses, and to have a small impact on improving the overall
Kernersville quality of life.' Page 64 this area. however
the legacy
Agreed, preserving the agricultural land may not b( fh fo its inth s?area?r Conservation des gn promotes
plan promotes the concept of conservation design P l permanent preservation of the sensitive and
the concentration of developed portions of an area, and per streams in undeveloped portions of a site. Irecommend
development plan, and trequi? nent g conservation asements5 on
outside the
streams
the permanently protected portions of hose
those areas. I would also recommend extended
protective buffers ton th se st reams th at enter and leave
boundary of the Pine Hills project area, a require provide as much
the Pine Hills site periodically. It is especially Important with riparian corridors to aired to an extent
connected habitat as possible to ensure is an iildliff ecologi al function is not imp here to do greater than absolutely necessary. There opportunity
6. The Vision 2005 has a growth management map component. The proposed development is located in d as areas the Growth Areas 48 Long Range and 5 Rural Area. The system R Aa a Ghereh Area is idd noieexper nce _
the
that 'cannot be served efficiently by the existing sewer
outer significant development" (page 24). The Long Range Growth Area i ^dedn d gee rialll of long ra 9e
represents the propos
` boundaries of the sewerable drainage basins
the adoption of the Vision 2005, (-40 has been
_ urban development in Forsyth Couny" (page )- Since
has os is alerij planning tot ex end sewer
_ svil completed and the Town of KernersBitolard and City Countyt Util tieMnston
lNaflcnrtown, City County Planning
into those two growth areas.
The actions documented in this planning report appear to have ignored the goals of the Vision 2005 report. apidly
'and Introduction of water and sewer services nto a region can rand doe cau a significant impact to the
. dynamics. Rapid expansion infrastructure the State Environmental Protection Act scoping procedure to
areas resources. Please consider utilizing
investigate potential environmental issues in this area.
The Legacy Plan has a specific section on the Union CrosslAbbotts Creek area. The Plan states: 'high
?' even to-preparing a detailed plan for the Union Cross/ Abbotts Creek area in
priority should beg h this area is now mostly rural with some newer suburban
southeastern Forsyth County. Although
development, there is considerable potential for significant residential and commercial development in
the area over the next decade' (page 37). The plan recommends "conservation development". It ased
residen
and new planningbuilding
nonresidential states conservation development the area thatbdrew poncaucombination oftexisial
rmland
development. plan for for the a
including open space. subdivision requirements, watershed nd i focused, local serving tcomamercia!
Preservation Program, transfer of development rights, ace and rural character in the area while
development at 'village centers" would conserve much open sp 37).
allowing for significant residential and nonresidential development" (page fer of
is a sticky
addressed most of this-issue earlier, however. thenceh elver thesWate hed P o ect on u es allow for the
one. It is not permitted in North Carolina at t po
averaging of densities on non-contiguous parcels. This density averaging concept would allow for density
impervious permanent preservation of ore aroopriatte portions of a development site. Implement ng a form of density
surface coverage in oche PpP
hn - J t7C-hT TO hT FiPl.1 JCQCCTJFTF- XPA I IT -INM X1'11 HM ATn
averaging may allow for the maximization of buildable area while preserving the most sensitive areas at he
r
same time.
of the area, Th
8. Conservation Area:
majO proposed development is setting aside 216 ± acres as a are Lan The only developmen s that will take
Thep Po
sensitive natural areas will be retained within the he cons arks water quality ponds, utilities and road
a prime candidate for stream restoration.
place within the conservation area are pedestrian pathways,
crossings. If this conservation area is approved it becomes
have seen that th st senotf good practiceW1Pl cing
While it is legal to place water quality ponds. sediment
to rotect is a recipe for disaster.
dose proximity to streams or within the buffer one
these engineered devices in close proximity to the areas you are trying p il, are
Sediment settling basins and st m these e de devices are not engi eered for extremeaweather evlents. These
not well maintained, and many time s s thes ing devices are best positioned outside the buffer h zones
as wellnasamaintain ngaa natu aliandnu disurbed
-aDh . should ld at a 9 Priority at this point in time,
post development hydrogi
point in
buffer area. Additionally stream restoration on upper pompro Creek is not necessary
mimay be nimum necessary as 50 foot sbuffeO on all
however, if the headwater streams within the site are to preserve a it
nt the clearing of the first 20 feet of the stream buffer
the near future. I would recommend
headwater stream areas and make an effort to preve
on those water sources. determ SCHOOLS: There are several multipliers that can be uaeUNC Chapel Hill profess kids per
housi units. A survey or, his associates and
9. completed in 1996 by Dr. Emil Mal z
oCarolina, reported in
_ p
largest
that in 1 96 North Caroili a Writing
impt from the Apartment- Association
Impact ct Fe Feee's" in Planning magazine September-1997 ailments. Using house
and. urban areas had an average a familyt uni ss per'single 9 231 schoolchildren and the 1,392
those multipliers the 1,353 sting
multifamily units would produce 612 school children with a combined total of 9,843 school
know
This number seems low. ( were, analways seen a figure of 2 d when they were collected. children per household. I would want to
what the other multipliers w r
osed development. The City County Wator and Sewer
1o. Water Lsewer:
Public water and sewer wilt serve the prop nt (proposed developers have worked out a
Utilities, Town of Kernersville and The Ridgewood Group (P P Sewe the
sewer agreement for this development. City i? st ?We1opment and thetilirna is pre aeetsyof the Abbotts
pump station and sewer trunk lines to serve station is presently planned .to be located just
Creek basin north of Watkins Ford Road. The pump
north of Watkins Ford Road
This project will likely be subject to a State Environmental a Protection Act review is imat will be nevi his project
state agencies for consistency with environmental rules
work in concert with the development of Pine Hills so that all issues are-explored and discussed in the most
efficient way possible.
There
17.
e map on
area f 1. I am concerned with the stream buffers, ideriis sdte gIt is reen
critical to provide some cons sten revel of s
where the streams enter and exit the Pine H ainta protection along all reaches of streams in
h outer most
100 foot buffer should be measured from the atop ofI e
functional capacity ty. Additionally th
cn'a CC:hT Tn VT 6PW )C4r,(? TJr, I(,:)(PA AIT-1H00 A-IIHM AM
-s
bank of a perennial stream. This probably coincides with the 100 year flood plain. Maintaining the pre and
post development hydrograpti snould be a nigh priority as well as the mointenanco of a natural buffer zone.
Buffer zones that are grassed do not provide the, same level of protection as an undisturbed buffer zone.
12. Wetlands: qualified wetland
The developer is following the federal and state required wetland impact mitigation. e q development site.
consultant firm. ECS Limited, was hired to inventory and flag the wetlands oo he The U.S. Army Corps of
The developer is now in the process of finalizing the surveying of
Engineers and DENR will then undertake all reviews and permits for disturbance to the wetlands.
Depending on the final configuration of the site plan, it may be necessary to apply for an Army Corps of
Engineers Individual Permit. This requires that the project have a 30 day minimum public comment period,
and will involve close coordination with the Wetland staff of the Division of Water Quality.
13. Watershed & Stormwater.
The proposed development is in the Abbotts Creek Watersned. Tnis watershed is a water sourco to ormwater Thomasville and Lexington. The Town of Kernersville Watershed protection Cl rd nsinance and Sttd by the
review apply to this development. The North Carolina water quality reg
d ng permits
ons are implemented during he Final Development thBuil is development.
Department of local regulations Environmental
The state and loco! reg
reviews. - - state
and
ons to Public concern has been expressed
t water ssuesn9Ththe ality of e public has uthe rightetot pet tion those governments to
_ address watershed an
amend their regulations.
his opportunity
Many focal governments have improved their watershed proteof' Kemersv Ile to cons de1ri ad more
measures for watershed protection. We encourage the Cty
c aster wi h herttown icularly
developing measures that would better protect the headwater stream systemsl of this
eam resources of Kernersville.
as it relates to the goals of the Legacy Plan. The Division of Water Quality help develop techniques and ordinances if so desired to better protect the strwil work to
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this project. If you have any questions or comments,
please do not hesitate to call. My telephone number is [phone] extension 366.
PRh s
WatershedPlanner
NC Division of Water Quality
on'.1 QC: hT Tn nT 6PW )C4C(7_T)F,TF,: xPa J, I T-II-Ir1Cl A-IIHm ATO
THE CITY OF LEXINGTON
NORTH CAROLINA
CA1L°~
"GROWING WITH THE PIEDMONT"
OFFICE OF THE
MAYOR
May 8, 2001
Post-It- Fax Noto 7671 Date 5 8 0 paye8
To Ft S
Mayor Larry Brown CO' 00IDept. S
Town of Kernersville Phone . S l D
P.O. Box 728 Fax. Fei" ??rf 3- 3
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728 3 ~ D
Re: Fine Hills Development
impact on the Watershed of Lake Thom-A-Lex
Dean Mayor Brown:
The City of Lexington is very concerned about the impact of the proposed Pine Hills Development
on Lake Thom-A-Lex. If my information is correct, this development will disturb almost 1 and 1/2
square miles of a watershed which covers only 70 square miles.
Lake Thom-A-Lex is the -sole water'supply for more than 40,000 people in' Davidson County. A
development of this size will have an initial negative impact on the lake through increased sediment
loading and will decrease the lake's yield long term through degrading the watershed.
In' 1999, the Cities of Lexington and Thomasville' and Davidson County endorsed a letter which
expressed our concerns about development of this watershed. These concerns remain the same.. I
am attaching a copy of the letter for your reference.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Richard L. Thomas, Mayor
City of Lexington
Attachrnent
cc: Hubert Leonard, City of Thomasville Mayor
Roger Spach, Water Resources Superintendent
Rack Austin, Public Works Director
22 WEST CENTER STREET - LEXINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 27292 - PH. 336-248-3910 - FAX [phone]
67-2?-7
CITY OF LEXINGTON .? SNORTH CAROLINA
CAao
"SERVING THE COMMUNITY SINCE 1828
28 WEST CENTER STREET August 26, 1999 TELEPHONE [phone]
LEXINGTON, NC 27292
Mr. Fred Luce
City-County Planning Board
P.O. Box 2511
Winston Salem, N.C. 27107
Re: Draft Legacy Comprehensive Plan for Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Luce:
On behalf of the Cities of Lexington and Thomasville and Davidson County, we would like to
express our concerns on the above plan. This plan designates the Lake Thom-A-Lex watershed
as one of the growth areas in Forsyth County. This area was previously designated for farm land
and similar uses. _
Take Thom-A-Lcx is the water supply lake for the Cities of Lexington and Thomasville,
representing more than 40,000 people in Davidson County-with their homes and jobs. Since its
construction in 1957, its siltation has filled in about 200/o of the take. Irresponsible development
in the watershed will accelerate this sedimentation and reduce the quantity and quality of the
water received by the two cities.
i
We, the Cities of Lexington and Thomasville and Davidson County, wish to express our
concerns that the following be maintained in the watersheds represented:
1. Enforcement of their existing minimum water supply watershed rules adopted by the
State of North Carolina-
2- Maintaining natural vegetative buffers along streams versus grassed buffers.
About 27% of the Lake Thom-A-Lex watershed is in Forsyth County. Accelerated growth in this
watershed will impact Take Thom-A-Lex. Costs for dredging the lake and for treating a
deteriorated water supply will be enormous. These can be significantly reduced and postponed
by responsible growth.
r-,
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Richard Thomas on Truell Larry Potts
Mayor, Lexington Mayor, Thorn Chairman, Couhty
Commission

April 18, 2001
Mr. Jeff Hatling, AICP
Planning Director
Town of Kernersville
P.O. Drawer 728
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728
_j
Re: Pine Hills Development
The Ridgewood Group
Proposed Rezoning Application
Dear Jeff:
I still have questions/concerns regarding the overall flooding and surface water quality issue(s)-
: of the Pine .Hills -Development as: proposed, both as they affect the near- community and the -
-Abbotts Creek Basin as a7whole. My principal questions/concerns are summarized as follows:
• How can the Town of Kernersville, having prior knowledge of the potential for flooding of
downstream properties, approve rezoning of the Pine Hills property without incurring
liability for any resulting damages, unless the Town takes the precautionary step of
requiring the Ridgewood Group to perform an impact study of potential flooding hazards
resulting from stormwater runoff/dam breach as a condition of rezoning?
Per Chapter B, Article II, Section C (3)(b)(ii)[D] of the UDO, Supplementary District
Requirements, MU-S District Application, Site Plan Requirements and Procedure, Larger
Sites:
"Larger sites containing more than 300 acres Nvill be evaluated to
determine if development will negatively impact existing or future
public facilities and services (emphasis added). Depending upon the size,
intensity, and/or complexity of the proposal, the Director of Planning may
require the petitioner to submit additional information to assist regulatory
agencies with their findings, including, but not limited to (emphasis
added), analysis of traffic impacts, availability of public water and sewer,
and capacity of schools. As warranted, staff may also recommend certain
c"
Mr. Jeff Hatling
April 18, 2001
Page 2
on-site or off-site infrastructure improvements or other mitigation
measures (emphasis added) as conditions for zoning approval."
Further, the Town has jurisdictional authority and implied responsibility for these actions
via municipal stormwater permitting/watershed protection ordinances, specifically Sections
5-5.2(E)(1) and (F) of the Town's Watershed Protection Ordinance.
Any flood impact studies should identify the design criteria (design/emergency storm
frequency and duration) utilized to model and/or mitigate flood potential along the
Hedgecock Rd.., Teague Ln., Watkins Ford Rd. stream corridor(s). Assumptions
regarding location and composition of impervious surfaces relative to existing conditions,
runoff before and after construction, and the location(s), number(s), and size(s) of either
in-stream or conventional stormwater control ponds should be identified. Further, the
intended use/status of the existing 'dams should be noted. Whether the dams will be
upgraded or removed should be determined, so that environmental impacts can be
evaluated.
It is my understanding that the- Ridgewood Group-may utilize the existing dams as
stormwater control structures and that the three exiting dams may be reclassified and
reconstructed as NC DENR Class C (high hazard) dams. In view that these potentially
high hazard dams may be used as stormwater control structures, the public health and
safety issues related to risk of breach or failure merit the most careful consideration and
technical evaluation.
• As a separate but related matter, I have the following questions/concerns regarding the impacts
of the Pine Hills project on surface water quality as they relate to the Town's Watershed
Protection Ordinance.
From conversations at the March 21, 2001 DRC meeting and followup with staff, it is my
understanding that the proposed development is in the WS-III watershed area of the
Abbotts Creek Basin and that high density options and Special Nonresidential Intensity
Allocations (SNIAs) as defined in the Ordinance may be requested which would then
require 100 ft vegetative buffers along perennial waters (USGS solid blue line
watercourses - including rivers, streams, lakes, and ponds) and the construction of
engineered stormwater controls.
Because of the critical nature of the existing water supply to Lexington/Thomasville and
the potential negative impact of this project on the water quality of the Abbotts Creek
Basin, consideration should be given to requiring special conditions for rezoning under
4F
Mr. Jeff Hatling
April 18, 2001
Page 3
Section C (3)(b)(ii)[D] of the UDO (above) and Sections 5-5.2(E)(1) and (F) of the Town's
Watershed Protection Ordinance. The special conditions should attempt to partially
mitigate the cutting of several hundred acres of trees (which reduce runoff and are
protective of streams and habitat) and their replacement with roof tops and asphalt
surfaces. The special conditions could reasonably include 100 ft minimum-width
protected vegetative buffers, etc. with the more stringent application to all watercourses,
including existing intermittent springs/streams, all perennial streams, lakes, ponds, and
wetlands (where more protective than existing State and Federal regulations), similar to
1 those in effect in the Deep River Basin.
Chapter C - Environmental Ordinance, Article V - Watershed Protection (K), Sections 5-
5.2(E)(1) and (F) read in part:
i
"(E) The Watershed Review Committee shall issue a high density watershed
permit... upon finding that the proposal is consistent with the applicable
standards set forth in the Watershed Protection Ordinance and upon
finding that the following conditions are met (emphasis added):
(1) The use will not endanger the public health or safety (emphasis
added) if located where proposed and developed according to the plan as
submitted and approved ...
(F) The Watershed Review Committee may set forth additional permit
conditions (emphasis added) as it deems necessary to meet the requirements
of this Ordinance..."
For a project of this size, minimal adherence to existing regulations and ordinances.may
be inadequate protection of water quality in the Abbotts Creek Basin. Further, the overall
cumulative environmental impacts of a project of this complexity cannot be evaluated
within the structure of a piecemeal approval of the project's stormwater controls and
stream buffers. These impacts should be evaluated prior to initial zoning approval.
Zoning approval should be subject to special conditions, as indicated by the potential
negative impacts.
• The Bush-administration recently affirmed the earlier Clinton-administration rule effectively
reasserting the Tullock.Wetlands rule. The NC Environmental Management Commission
(EMC) recently decided to place Carolina Bays, pocosins, mountain bogs, and other
isolated wetlands off limits to development. What are the impacts of these rule changes
1
Mr. Jeff Hatling
April 18, 2001
Page 4
on required buffers and permitted disturbance activities of the jurisdictional wetlands
within the project footprint and along the proposed sewer/water lines?
When the wetlands delineation maps for the project are submitted in final form, I would
appreciate the opportunity to review the maps and ground-truth the areas delineated by the
developer relative to USACE guidance criteria.
The size/impact of a 922 acre high density project on a property with significant forested areas
within the critical Abbotts Creek watershed underscores the importance of at least a preliminary
evaluation of flooding/environmental impacts during the early site planning phases so that the
Planning Board members and Aldermen who make critical decisions regarding Town finances and
growth can make an informed decision with regard to cost, risks, and impacts of this project on
the public health and safety, the environment, and infrastructure.
As discussed in my letter of March 20, 2001, an argument could be made that a more moderate
density development around redesign of the existing golf course to incorporate sand/water hazards
for stormwater retention would limit increases in impervious area, maintain similar-to-existing
rates of infiltration, limit runoff, and minimize potential downstream impacts of flood inflation
and/or dam breach. - Further, I suspect that the strong community objections to the project in its
current form could be turned into community support.
Please confirm, and correct as necessary, my understanding of the developer's and the Town's
intent regarding the aforementioned and any misunderstanding(s) I may have regarding the
applicability of the referenced ordinances. I would appreciate the opportunity to either attend or
obtain minutes of related Development Review Committee and Watershed Review Committee
meeting(s). I also look forward to hearing the results of your consultation with Mr. Doug Jewell,
P.E..
Thank you for your continued consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
,/'> / ? d /_? - .
R. Edward He gecock, P.E., P.G.
5979 Hedgecock Road
Kernersville, NC 27286
[phone]
cc w/ attachments:
Mr. Russell Radford, P.E.
Mr. Ron Wooten (Planning Board)
G A O,
yq
0 0
Q' 9
eal)SEAL
8513
.,,III (

March 20, 2001
Mr. Jeff Hailing, AICP
Planning Director
Town of Kernersville
P.O. Drawer 728
Kernersville, NC 27285-0728
Re: Pine Hills Development
The Ridgewood Group
Proposed Rezoning Application
Dear Jeff:
Based on my brief review of the Conceptual Master Plan for the subject property prepared by
Seamon, Whiteside & Associates, Inc. and the Zoning Survey for Pine Tree of the Triad, LLC.
prepared by Fleming Engineering, Inc., both submitted March 12, 2001 to the Town of
Kernersville for the purposes of a rezoning request, I have the following questions/comments
regarding the impacts of the proposed high density (MU-S) rezoning. These comments are
supplementary to the technical concerns, adverse impacts and public costs of roads, utilities,
fire/police services, garbage disposal, schools, etc. to be reviewed by your staff and the DRC.
Similarly, the burdens of traffic congestion, noise, pollution, etc. to be borne by the neighboring
community are issues which will be raised later by other adjacent property owners and are not
addressed herein. I also have not directly addressed issues which will be dictated by existing
watershed ordinances, wetlands permits, and sedimentation and erosion control permits. Please
forward my questions/comments to the Development Review Committee (DRC). My preliminary
concerns are as follows:
• The site plan (Conceptual Master Plan) prepared for rezoning was sealed by a landscape
architect licensed to practice in SC. Per the attached letter from the NC Board of
Landscape Architects, Mr. Kenneth R. Seamon is not currently licensed to practice in the
State of NC. Board rules require that the practice of landscape architecture in the State
of NC be performed by, or under the supervision of, a landscape architect licensed to
practice in NC. I don't see how a NC municipality can legally accept and rely on
documents for rezoning purposes not prepared in accordance with NC General Statutes.
• Are the existing dams to be rehabilitated, one or more dams removed, or are new dams
proposed? The following comments presume the existing dams will remain in place;
however, similar comments/regulations apply for new construction.
?r
Mr. Jeff Hatling
March 20, 2001
Page 2
Three small earthen dams or dikes are present on the property. The dams impound three
lakes located in series. The plans presented for rezoning are to such a scale that neither
the height of the dams, the impoundment capacity of the lakes, nor the extent of the
drainage basins can be accurately determined based on available information. The existing
principal CMP pipe spillway of the most downstream dam is in visibly poor condition and
shows signs of erosion in the area of the spillway outlet along the downstream toe and
signs of internal erosion along the pipe itself. The emergency spillway is a grassed
earthen overflow area (golf-tee area) of undetermined width and elevation. The zoning
survey indicates that a water main easement crosses the middle dam. One or more of the
dams have trees growing from the downstream embankment. Runoff to the lakes, risk of
failure of the dams, and the potential threat of loss of life and property damage will
increase under the proposed development.
Under the Dam Safety Act of 1967 and GS 143-215.25A, dams less than 15 ft in height
(measured from original stream bottom to crest of dam) or whose impoundment capacity
is less than 10 acre-ft are exempt from regulation unless the Department determines that
failure of the dam could result in loss of human life or significant damage to property
below the dam- Per the attached NC DENR inventory record of dams, the downstream
dam is currently regulated under GS 143-215.25A as a low hazard (Class A) dam, 18.3
ft. in height, and impounding 56 acre-ft of water at normal pool.
Since failure of either of the upstream earthen structures could put the downstream
structure at risk, the consequences of the lower dam's failure also guides the hazard
classification of the upper dams (NCAC 2k .0105(e)). Given that the failure of the lower
dam could potentially cause loss of life or serious damage to homes, industrial and
commercial buildings and important public utilities (the gas pipeline), the three existing
dams and/or any new construction could be classified by the NC DENR as Class C (or
high hazard dams).
Several questions regarding the possible impacts of the proposed high density development
as it relates to the earthen dams come to mind:
What is the actual height of the downstream dam from invert of the stream at the
downstream toe to the crest elevation? What are the individual and combined
impoundment volumes of the three lakes? What is the impact of increased runoff into the
three lakes resulting from the impervious surfaces of the proposed high density
development as compared to the existing grass/woodland areas? Are the existing principal -
and emergency spillway capacities adequate to pass the increased run-off during the
appropriate design storm? How does development of areas downstream of the dams affect
'01-
Mr. Jeff Hailing
March 20, 2001
Page 3
risk classification of the dams? What is the proposed NC DENR hazard classification of
the dams? What is the impact of a dam break analysis on flood profiles of the stream
after the 10 year build-out? What is the impact of dam failure on the proposed NCDOT
upgrades and raising of the existing bridges on Hedgecock Road and Teague Lane, on
downstream properties, the water main, and on the Transcontinental gas pipeline?
Both the Town and the Ridgewood Group should be aware that approval of the project's
sediment and erosion control plans and the dam and spillway design modifications may be
a time consuming process. Because of limited staffing, a review period of 6 months - 1
year is not uncommon. Given the recent history of the Century Park Lake and Dam, the
Town Attorney should be consulted regarding Town ownership and maintenance of
proposed roadways (proposed I-40 frontage road to Teague Lane) or utilities and their
interrelationship to any underlying dams." Does Kernersville intend to accept ownership
and maintenance responsibilities for roads and utilities from the Ridgewood Group?
• Currently, flooding occurs along the southern end of Teague Lane during the 5 year and
10 year storm events. Coupled with flows passing the spillway(s), the increased
impervious surface area of the portions of the watershed downstream of the dams may
affect the elevation and width of the defined flood plain during non-catastrophic events
(storms not breaching nor causing failure of the dam(s)). Does the combined width of the
floodway and flood fringe shown on the proposed plans represent the 25 year or 100 year
storms? Does the designated width/elevation at the flood corridor consider the increased
impervious surface area of the proposed high density development? What is the impact
on downstream properties? Do the buffers provided adequately protect the water quality
of the streams or are the streams adversely impacted by the proposed usage?
t
• It is my understanding that a request is pending for zoning reclassification to multiuse
(MU-S). If no specific uses are established for various areas of the property, how can the
extent of impervious surface be determined and impacts evaluated? Should not more
specific zoning classifications be required in the commercial, industrial, office, and
institutional portions of the site?
• What restrictions and/or special conditions will be adopted by the developer and/or the
Town of Kernersville to mitigate the adverse construction impacts of a project of this
magnitude on adjacent property owners? Will blasting of rock be required? If so, what
blast control measures will be implemented? Will dust control measures be required and
debris burning bans put in place? -What sedimentationlerosion control measures will be
in place? Will construction traffic and deliveries be restricted to specific roads and
entrances? What efforts to minimize construction noise will be made? Will nighttime
..
Mr. Jeff Hatling
March 20, 2001
Page 4
construction be allowed? Will buffers be provided between the development and adjacent
housing?
Conversely, what buffers will be provided to protect the new development from preexisting
farmland and related usages?
• Has a drinking water supply well survey of surrounding properties been conducted? Based
on geohydrological modeling, what is the impact of the increased impervious surface area
on groundwater recharge, groundwater levels, and resulting well yields?
Please note that solutions to many of the water quantity (infiltration vs. stormwater runoff) and
water quality issues raised herein could be incorporated in a redesign of the existing golf course
to incorporate sand/water hazards for stormwater'retention with more moderate density and larger
lot sizes. Such a design would limit increases in impervious area, maintain "similar-to-existing"
rates of infiltration, and minimize downstream impacts of flood inflation and/or dam breach.
Please provide confirmation that the questions/comments included herein have been provided to
the responsible parties and submitted for review to the Town's DRC. As response and additional
information becomes available from the developer regarding these and additional issues raised by
the DRC, I would appreciate the opportunity to review any revised plans in greater detail. Thank
you.
Sincerely,
R. Edward Hedgecoc , P.E., P.G. 10 ti9 s
5979 Hedgecock Roa SEAL
Kernersville, NC 27286 = 8513
[phone] GIN
cc w/ attachments: Mr. Russell Radford, P.E. , Y l
Mr. Ron Wooten (Planning Board)

?Ilb /kks
North Carolina Board of Landscape Architects
Post Office Box 41225- Raleigh. NC 27629-1225 • Telephone [phone]- Fax [phone]
Email rmuptonfbellsouth.net
March 15, 2001
Kenneth R. Seamon
Seamon, Whiteside & Associates
503 Wando Park Blvd Suite 100
Mount Pleasant, SC 29464-7849
Dear Mr. Seamon:
Information in the form of copies of plans submitted by you
and your company for a subdivision in Kernersville, NC, has
been received by this board.
You are advised that NC General Statues 89A prohibit anyone
not registered with this Board to practice landscape
architecture in North Carolina. Our records do not show you
as being registered.
However, since your company is registered with the Board,- you .
should have your North Carolina registrant, John Gastley or
any employee registered here, to seal documents for work in
this state.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Robert M. Upton
Board Administrator
xc: Thomas Meacham, Office of the Attorney General

PINE TREE LAKE DAM #1 , FORSY-080
Identification /Status: Location:
STATE ID FOR SY-080 REGION WSRO
NID ID N000368 COUNTY FORSY
DAM NAME PINE TREE LAKE DAM #1 QUADRANGLE KERNERSVILLE
OTHER DAM NAM FS LATITUDE 36 0678
DAM STATUS IMPOUNDING LONGITUDE 80.0933
DAM TYPE RE RIVER OR STREAM ABBOTTS CREEK-TR
PURPOSES R RIVER BASIN YADKIN
YEA R DAM CONST COMPLETED 1970 NEARES T CI TY- TO I VA' WALLBURG
DAM CONSTRUCTED BY JENTERY CONST CO DIST NRST CITY-TO1 ?V, Ml 5
}`E4R MOD717ED/REPAIRED POP NEAREST C717' TomA, 100
PHASE I REPORT? N
LAST PERAUT AC77ON
Hazard Information:
LASTPERMITACTIONDATE
FLAZARD CLASS L
IL4Z4RD DESCRIPTION
Dimensions / Details: EAP? NR
STRUCTURAL HEIGHT, FT 18.3
IfYDRAULICHEIGHT, FT 13.3 Diyner/ Contact Information:
NORNIAL FREEBOARD, FT 5
OW7bER NAME
TRIAD PROJECTS INC
CREST LENGTH, FT 285 OWNER TYPE P
CREST 97DTH, FT
MAILING ADDRESS, LII`El
PO DRAWER 614
UPSTREAM SLOPE, XH: I V AfAILING ADDRESS, LINE 2
DOIPNSTREAAI SLOPE, XH:7V
CITY
WINSTON-SALEM
PSPIVYT1PE
STALE
NC
ESPWY TYPE
ZIP CODE
27102
MAX DISCH FROM mffs, CFS 231
ALTADDRESS, LINE 1
BOTTOM DRAIN?
ALTADDRESS, LINEZ
BOTTOM DRAIN OPERABLE?
ALT CITY
LOW" FLOW'REQUIREMENT, CFS
ALT STATE
RESERVOIR ELEVATION ALT ZIP CODE
DRAINAGE AREA, AC 384 OWNER PHONE
SURFACEAREA, AC g ALTORWER PHONE
NORMAL POOL CPC7Y, AGFT 56
CONTACT NAME IFNOT OWNER
MAX IMPOUND CPCTY, AC-FT 67
CONTACT NAA1E PHONE
EMERG PHONE 1 NAME
Inspection Information: EAfERGPHONEI
EMERG PHONE 2 NAME
LAST INSPECTION DATE 1272000 EM ERG PHONE 2
INSPECTOR(S) ENGINEER FREEMAN BROTHERS
NEXT INSPECTION DATE 1272005
ENGR MAILING ADDRESS
NOD DAIS ENGR CITY
NOD DEADLINE DATE ENGR STATE
NOD RESOLVED?
ENCR ZIP CODE
ENGINEER PHONE
COMMENTS
DIRECTIONS TO DAM
I
Report Printed: Tuesday, March 20, 2001
NC Inventory of Darns
Triage Check List
Date: 1/04/06 Project Name: Caleb's Creek SD
DWQ#: 05-2116
County: Forsyth
To:
Daryl Lamb, Winston-Salem Regional Office
60-day processing time:
V7
Ul
IP Due 2/18/06 L U,',
From: Cyndi Karoly Telephone: [phone]
The file attached is being forwarded to you for your evaluation.
Please call if you need assistance.
? Stream length impacted
? Stream determination
Wetland determination and distance to blue-line surface waters on USFW topo maps
? Minimization/avoidance issues
? Buffer Rules (Meuse, Tar-Pamlico, Catawba, Randleman)
? Pond fill
Mitigation Ratios
? Ditching
? Are the stream and or wetland mitigation sites available and viable?
? Check drawings for accuracy
Is the application consistent with pre-application meetings?
El
? Cumulative impact concern
Comments: As per our discussion regarding revision of the triage and delegation processes,
please review the attached file. Note that you are the first reviewer, so this file will need to be
reviewed for administrative as well as technical details. If you elect to place this project on hold,
please ask the applicant to provide your requested information to both the Central Office in
Raleigh as well as the Asheville Regional Office. As we discussed, this is an experimental, interim
procedure as we slowly transition to electronic applications. Please apprise me of any
complications you encounter, whether related to workload, processing times, or lack of a "second
reviewer" as the triage process in Central had previously provided. Also, if you think of ways to
improve this process, especially so that we can plan for the electronic applications, let me know.
Thanks!
v
I I
US Army Corps
Of Engineers
Wilmington District
DS - IIkLP
PUBLIC NOTICE pap .1
t
Issue Date: December 21, 2005
Comment Deadline: January 20, 2006
Corps Action ID #: 200620218
The Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) has received an application from
Caleb Creek Properties, LLC seeking Department of the Army authorization to impact
approximately 6903 linear feet of stream channels, 5.75 acres of wetlands, and 2.165
acres of open waters of the jurisdictional waters of Abbotts Creek associated with the
development of a new residential community (Caleb's Creek Subdivision) that includes
construction of roads, sewer lines, a school, and maintenance / rehabilitation of an
existing dam.
Specific plans and location information are described below and shown on the attached
plans. This Public Notice and all attached plans are also available on the Wilmington
District Web Site at www.saw.usace.army.mil/wetlands
Applicant: Caleb Creek Properties, LLC
342 N. Elm Street Suite 6 D @
Greensboro, NC 27401 V l5 D
AGENT: Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants, IncQEC 2 8 2005
P.O. Box 224
Newton, NC 28658 DENR-WATERpUAtITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Authority
The Corps will evaluate this application and a decide whether to issue, conditionally
issue, or deny the proposed work pursuant to applicable procedures of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act.
Location
The 939-acre proposed project site is located on both sides of Teague Road (SR 2630),
approximately five miles south of Kernersville, in Forsyth County, North Carolina.
Coordinates (in decimal degrees) for the site are 36.0668 North, 80.0923 West. The site
is adjacent to Abbotts Creek including several unnamed tributaries of the Yadkin River
and includes approximately 16 acres of jurisdictional wetlands adjacent to these
jurisdictional stream' channels in the Yadkin River Basin (8-Digit Cataloging Unit
03040103).
1
Existing Site Conditions
The land use in the area surrounding the project consists of single-family housing,
forested tracts, and agricultural tracts. The area is currently subject to increasing
residential pressure.
The land use of the project itself consists of an existing golf course, which totals about
30% of the project area, open agricultural fields, which total 40%, and forested areas,
which total approximately 30%. The site contains several small perennial streams that
flow into Abbotts Creek, which also flows north to south through the western portion of
the property. There are approximately 16 acres of wetlands and approximately 22 acres
of ponds located throughout the property. Several of these ponds are situated around the
existing golf course and provide irrigation water for the golf course.
Applicant's Stated Purpose
As stated by the applicant, the purpose of the project is to develop a residential
community, including a school, and the redevelop of the existing golf course.
Project Description
The project consists of the construction of a residential community that impacts regulated
Waters of the US for the construction of roads, sewer lines, a school site, and dam
maintenance and rehabilitation. Impacts to `'Maters of the US will result from piped road
crossing that access high ground, wetland and stream impacts needed for golf facilities,
open trench cuts for installation of sewer facilities, and impacts associated with the
development of a school site.
Development of the site will require clearing for the proposed road right of ways, piping
for the proposed road crossings, impacts associated with the construction of sewer line
crossings, and grading for the proposed golf course. Heavy equipment,, including graders,
pan scrapers, excavators, bull dozers, etc. will be used for the construction of the project.
Completion of the proposed project will require the piping of several streams for the
construction of 12 road crossings: 8 crossing result from the construction of thoroughfare
roads and 4 are necessary to access high ground within the subdivision. The proposed
impacts to streams channels resulting from the placement of fill material associated with
road crossings is 1506 linear feet for thoroughfare road and 687 linear feet for internal
roads. Impacts to Waters from the construction of roads total 1.14 acres of open water to
construct a causeway and 0.76 acres of wetlands. Sewer line crossings impact 344 linear
feet of streams and 0.042 acres of wetlands. Golf facilities, as proposed, will impact a
total 0.53 acres of wetlands and 1193 linear feet of streams. Grading for recreational
fields will impact 0.201 acres of isolated wetlands. Pond construction and darn,
2
rehabilitation will, as proposed, impact 1.047 acres of wetlands and another 0.257 acres
of open waters. Grading necessary to configure a safe school site and eliminate an
attractive nuisance will impact 0.768 acres of pond surface area and 733 linear feet of
streams. The applicant proposes to fill 0.991 acres of wetlands associated with grading
for lots. Plans included with this notice show the overall proposed site layout which if
permitted would impact 6903 linear feet of streams, 5.75 acres of wetlands, and 2.165
acres. of open waters.
The applicant proposes to mitigate for permanent impacts to stream channels at a 1:1
ratio, wetland impacts at a 2:1 ratio, and open water at a 1.1 ratio. Under the proposal
5102 linear feet of stable stream pattern, profile, and dimension will be restored along
unnamed tributaries located within the existing golf course area. Streams will be
permanently protected under a conservation easement and will be replete with buffers in
accordance with local requirements that require 50-foot buffers. Wetland restoration
will occur within approximately 7.1 acres of previously drained wetland areas. Existing
ditches will be plugged with clay barriers and historic wetland areas are expected to
become saturated and inundated. The restoration has the intended consequence of
increasing the wetness of existing wetlands that are adjacent to the restored wetlands.
Wetland hydrology is expected to be enhanced in 4.2 acres. Approximately 2 acres of
open water will be created for an irrigation pond and an additional 0.5 acres of littoral
zones are proposed along pond edges.
Other Required Authorizations
This notice and all applicable application materials are being forwarded to the appropriate
State agencies for review. The Corps will generally not make a final permit decision
until the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) issues, denies, or waives
State certification required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (PL 92-500). The
receipt of the application and this public notice in the NCDWQ Central Office in Raleigh
serves as application to the NCDWQ for certification. A waiver will be deemed to occur
if the NCDWQ fails to act on this request for certification within sixty days of the date of
the receipt of this notice in the NCDWQ Central Office. Additional information
regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be reviewed at the NCDWQ Central
Office, 401 Oversight and Express Permits Unit, 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27604-2260. All persons desiring to make comments regarding the
application for certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act should do so in
writing delivered to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), 1650 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 Attention: Ms Cyndi Karoly by
January 13, 2006.
3
Essential Fish Habitat
This notice initiates the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation requirements of the
%,lagnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The Corps' initial
determination is that the proposed project will not adversely impact EFH or associated
fisheries managed by the South Atlantic or Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Councils
or the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Cultural Resources
The Corps has consulted the latest published version of the National Register of Historic
Places and is not aware that any registered properties, or properties listed as being
eligible for inclusion therein are located within the project area or will be affected by the
proposed work. Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistoric, or historical
data may be located within the project area and/or could be affected by the proposed
work.
Endangered Species
The Corps has reviewed the project area, examined all information provided by the
applicant and consulted the latest North Carolina Natural Heritage Database. Based on
available information, the Corps is not aware of the presence of species listed as
threatened or endangered or their critical habitat formally designated pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) within the project area. A final determination on
the effects of the proposed project will be made upon additional review of the project and
completion of any necessary biological assessment and/or consultation with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service."
Evaluation
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable
impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity on the public interest.
That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of
important resources. The benefit, which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors
which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects
thereof; among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental
concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain
values (in accordance with Executive Order 11988); land use, navigation, shoreline
erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy
needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property
ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. For activities involving
the discharge of dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, the evaluation of
the impact of the activity on the public interest will include application of the
Environmental Protection Agency's 404(b)(1) guidelines.
4
Commenting Information
The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local
agencies and officials, including any consolidate State Viewpoint or written position of
the Governor; Indian Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate
the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the
Corps of Engineers to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for
this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered
species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects and the other
public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an
Environmental Assessment (EA) and/or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Comments are also used to
determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the
proposed activity.
Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice,
that a public hearing be held to consider the application. Requests for public hearings
shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. Requests for a
public hearing shall be granted, unless the District Engineer determines that the issues
raised are insubstantial or there is otherwise no valid interest to be served by a hearing.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received
by the Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, until 5pm, January 20, 2006. Comments
should be submitted to John Thomas, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office, 6508 Falls of the
Neuse Road, Suite 120, Raleigh, NC 27615.
w l , I! i i; 1? so. 0000oW w, ? l i
O
n r.? ? 'r"°?F-f? ? t ' ? ? i 3- mR ? f ?c*?'-sSz? -•'?.? r.. i "'`/=Lj .%s _SrF''/Arn? = Y' f ,q Ya f `'. '!tom ?°
v;?4"Y(? -\ tii »_ L 1,
.,
,.-i .? ia
V
I j
j. . r• S _ ..+7 . ? -:.???? lw -.•il` -,\? ? cgs
DIM:
<lc L -ik? ,K. ? ? f ?? U"?`e'1tr%r
'e f
z f:
5 fir- 17p_-
--- --- --_" - -- ---
80.?66666?a wi ?-
-. `Y
{iA Z
p
iPQ
!t' Ty
F. L
sic
71
/?-.` i 'y?'• y? 3 I ?r'y-iii I,{ t p ?..?`?ist
K'S
CO
?. e w y`-? : t ? 1 s
r„
L
MV-
^E?S
F ? c r
?y r
r? g.f? r Y # h Rf L rf
Cl)
5 > r P. M
cr)
Cl)
y7 r t r t? .- a o
Z' o l C
Cf)
lrg,
?F?`?'
1 r?s j-..+` a J: 2 ? ? f rl 1 jt t'Vi+C"?iiP ? ?!`p"?:
WX_
".1 VIC.
Y7}? Y ?? "."mac
IN Y.N .f }rr- Sr?a?? .r.?? ?"i3e\\r? f ?`yc jti` + 1113' Ste" Sri,
a 1. .t ??j ? ?Y3? .t ?..? s ?`. •'ui r '`°24t_yc f '.??,_' - rr,;• r-. .?N ?s jr ?.t,
8 `"d -%i"?:•. ?'.`.'*-?l\.= c?_- -??-t#-.I•.3.. njva _ ?-a. t- - ??:.-"y,. _ '-(`
180.13:)9tt333°4di 11! 1 t i i 180.iaooooo°w' 1 1 180.066d66fia i i
acr : KERNERSVILLE Location: 036.05989279N 080.08803360vb7 Ii ? 2005
Date: 111=005 - Caption: Landuse Strategies- Caleb's Creek
3cz:e:1 inch equals 4000 feet. 15 f-? I a
RALEIGH REMAT
Coppight tcl 1998. Maptech, inc. ?1

EC.
'EllIVED
DEC a 2005
RALEIGHjEGULATO
YFIELD OFFICE

3?

Caleb's Creek Impact Table (November 21- 20051
RECEIVED
DEC 0 0 2005
Map
Impact
ID Purpose
for Impact Stream
length
(ft) Wetland
Area
(ac) Volume
Estimate
cu. d.) Impact
Type Proposed
Stream
Mitigation Proposed
&E AE
Miti ation Resource Type
ULATORY FIELD OFFI
1 sewer 71 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
2 sewer 0 .02 0 cut 0 0 slough WL
3 BMP 515 0 15 fill 515 0 isolated CH
4 recreation 0 0.068 10 fill 0 0.136 isolated WL
5 recreation 0 0.133 20 fill 0 0.266 isolated WL
6 road 242 0 10 pipe 242 . 0 perennial CH
7 golf 0 0.077 10 fill 0 0.154 forested WL
8 sewer 46 0.015 0 cut 0 0 int CH & WL
9 Qolf 0 0.23 35 fill 0 0.460 forested WL
10 road = - 286 0.45 80 pipe-fill 286 0.900 per CH & NVL
11 golf _ 0 0.132 20 fill 0 0.264 forested WL
12 golf 1193 0 35 pipe 1193 0 intermittent CH
13 dam 0 0.081 10 fill 0 0.162 forested WL
14 road 336 0 65 pipe 336 0 perennial CH
15 pool 100 0 0 dredge 0 0 perennial CH
16 restoration 593 0 0 restore 0 0 perennial CH
17 road 144 0 40 i e 144 0 erennial CH
18 drives 142 0 20 pipe 142 0 perennial CH
19 road = 152 0 44 pipe 152 0 perennial CH
20 sewer 57 0 0 cut 0 0 intermittent CH
21 road 360 0 10 i e 0 0 intermittent CH
22 road 33 0 1 pipe 0 0 intermittent CH
23 road 440 0.133 130 pipe 440 0.266 per CH & WL
24 dam 0 0.257 400 fill 0 0 open water
25 road 0 1.14 1000- fill 0 0 open water
26 road- 771 0.177 155 pipe-fill 771 0.354 forested WL
27 and 0 0.33 0 dredge 0 0.66 marsh
28 golf 0 0.099 15 fill 0 0.198 see
29 school 0 0.768 1000 pipe-fill 0 O open water
30 school 733 0 155 pipe fill 733 0 perennial CH
31 road 350 0 15 pipe 0 0 intermittent CH
32 road 148 0 40 pipe 148 0 perennial CH
33 and 0 0.649 0 dredge 0 1.298 forested WL
34 lots 0 0.823 550 fill 0 1.646 forested WL
35 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial C..
36 sewer 22 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
37 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
38 sewer 22 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
39 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
40 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
41 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0* perennial CH
42 sewer 0 0.007 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
43 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
44 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
45 lots 0 0.108 20 fill 0 0.216 forested WL
46 lots 0 0.060 15 fill 0 0.12 forested WL
Impacts 6903 5.757 - 3916 5102 1` 7.1 Mih.
;E
Qatlon

DEC 0 9 2005
FIELD OFFICE
-Wt A
404 401 Li"dtW Pa yokation
tiom
r.,....., .
x
0 N?'
O-NX (0:TNI
x x x
41 AREA
75,
Pi
rX?pW, t?
LLC

Arsa

r, I I ? . n -
t ? ??®a
?ma? 2421f
. ®a 37
to%
f
Y a±• ' G }lam`,.
`fi'r ? -•_y ?? ?
'AID #
Caleb Creek' Propert -,LLC .
?-?, - -_ -= 342 N Elm Street Ste. 8 4
Greenst*m, NC 17, 27401
heat- .._.o?
Arse 3 3
;gip;
342,N' lIn1'S wt S
/ 4 I q5 4
RhA?? +M a,'"t._ ?-•- ? l? g ?NoY,_;?,I yff?,,,; r ? i. i J(c??'
?.. / / rss
an MIP
pac"t- 4e,I
00 t6
AID.#
Caleb creek Prowtiea GLC
X 342, N.E1m,St W Ste. 6
- -_ -- ? - ,. , _-_ t3teeriaboro- PJC 27401 "- _?
_ Sheet of:
11 IN
< µ - - ? \ I - Ill
r ` - ?? , C?eb Creedc Pt ope?tles LLC
342 N Elm Street S#e. 6
Greenstaoro, NC 27401
Sheet of.
,J _
d? a(C?
??g? ?( 'JAI III O r1? 1? f11 'r ?(?\??lJ `r 11 ? ?.
?. arc-, g, U.?J U G 11 `?/ ??, ? ll oc S ;\

1 --A

i ?e?eiisadra' Nc 27401 r .
r ? r ,?tfi

,, , ?,. = Caleb Creek Properries LLC
342 N Elm Street Sts, 6.
- -- ?'- w
Greensboro, NC 2740,
Of
. ??F ?tfl o? 33
Anss 15-
'fit
l
17- ?
II
2

l Ce16b CrOok,Prppgrun lc
32 ElmStraet $ta 6
Shea boro''NC ?7d01

r• ??
Arcs 181
Strssrn, Jmpssl-142 ""
Arsa 9
77-
1:'li
} _j • ^ .? ? 1 ?y 11? 'y ? \ t? / 1 ? ? ? / ? _Ji- •L? ? ? X?' ? ,?? 4 -Y ? -??tt .
r ? ? ? :mot
1 / r/ F.:
AID
Caleb Creek P es L:LC
r4 ;? 1/r { y ?`? 342.M EIm Strwrot Stye
GMnsboro, PVC 27401
5
' ' / I .:.- "? \ Sheet of `

!? ^•,,??, "--'??'; ./ /?"+`' '„?:'?.`^ /w '?,S c%b}?'?"uu tlU ?U 7
U?
a ?•. J / f j ?"` u,. Cry ?p u 6 tJ ? ???
A47
l
"dog
AID"N
J ..? „C+alot Creek Propett W C
342?KOhi 8 rieet Shea 8
4reensborr 410'27441
N.
\
Ole,

l
\ ..?? A"
Arsa. 24
\ i Spain F , -
?-
o4o,
-;-- ?... ---.. ? Cai b Cr k Properties ,Lq
1 1 ?. 342?Nbm trfk:8'
? ,?; Greenstxxa,' NC 27401 E ,

.r • -fir-: ?'.? a
.w.

Wll' 1711.
/ J
11?
X111
1?'1
11?I,

??11\??.C

L

F
r
?, ,
27,
ZeN'
a
af,
1 <X14-W'
vor
jrJ?--
i ? ••,,.,.? \ `\ ? ?'"Y`'` „'•+.,,,, ?_"'.?•{ ?` : / ??.. Ltd .,,, {? 5 ?„ A .?'f;-1/*""`"/'r?• /. /? // t' 1 ?.
\` \ -??? ?, '? 1 -^ ? t?•-? 4 '':? ? ?. awl Y? ?'- /l ? -r..r•? ?? ?J /`? ! ? ..,/,/
'MT '..? +•.^" ../? w•+ ice/ ?•`• •,?,,,?,,,i .e' 1
?+? ?A• ?? / '7 •? ,,,? ?.,, ??.. 1. • ?'? .. ? r + Caipb, C.r?ek^prc?eitles I:IG ?,
r r'?r _
' ? I ? jI ? ?'' ? ' ?' ? ?• ? Sol n ?? 1rt1?(I
? J'?L1 J .y^. l; o ll (yi \' o1) rl IIf1I1?I ? U IJ
z { tv .l 't- . •.? '? ?•, i.??^*^ "\.;;,,yY ,.??;.1yy '4.t w'4r '•SJf{•, ?` .r ?.,> ``1 ;i
!4 ?' '" ,. 1 .r`Y•`?? 1 d, ?n ?' f + rah J? t? V ,????.N? 5.. f.
01W ?i
a..? ? 1 may, 4 (,• ?• `j\'$?\ \\\ '? Y-? ( `\\\ '•? `? `? p, • ? ; ?'` ? ??? t
J ?\ ? • l,.r"sa•Rn y.Y?/''K? ? .? r?. ! -? ?,? 1 ??',I :_YI-r r ? FT ?u •'?? ? t ?
19
d•'_ i. ?f ?1 «F r / ?-'i. `,,? :,j:... f. 1?»'aY v ?, ; ??1 r? ..t ?r i
,,,? ? ? ?,? t `? r?? ? ,? , ?\ *?„ n `'? •, I" Y? +pr- •.x'97\\ t
Ike
AID #
f'# Caleb' Creek Prnperifes LLG
342 N ?h 7 b
'" ?..Y 1 ??r ti ?i S n 3 r' D 7 F. +. 1 `gAt4 ?^ ??r!. - $ Elm' Sb*eel Ste. 6 ..•?
1
n*1 7! .w' ?4 - _- __ - Greensboro NC 27401
t
5 ?

r \
\\ e 4r '

?? r I l
I .1
°` rsa 'Sl
I a loo
?../ ?.?di?N
NN

?p ? r?11y ,
h } kr.t

? 4, f
Caleb; Creek PMPerties L.I.C
42.,N EIT Street Ste,
„i tiaau
C'3reeriskwro ' NO Td01
,,,,sue
7777777777-7-1
1 J, .

1
?? ! / / /? ?? wry "'-?`. I -+.* { ''•} CYtii? ? ? . L ?p ?? ? ?L??"
AID
Caleb .Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm StreefSts 6
Greenab(>6, PVC 27441
Sheet_o9

e4, a
?.. `;.k''`'\ 1 ? /, /\ .? ? ? ? 1? •?,. ??. ?' 1\ ? -"...'``?` `` ,? ? X411 tl ? Y : ? ?i'? ?.l ? ?'o? N ?Stl 0 -?.. ?j _
AID*
C*k Properdea
??Ir?t??tre?t?stia
. -? --? ?;"'Nc zzaoi ?.?
i
-74
P. .
r
(nom -?
---------------
x )x 7 ? .
"I x
A, r r,
i s
y,
3
c8
ac ..
"' Properties.
342 . 6
144 27401
Sh?of
Area 41
71
J f
s
k29
t v .
\\ \ ss
Cak)b Cre& Propordes LLC
342'N Elm Ste?d'Ste. 6
c-r? ,etc 27401
Int
Au Sa 4S
?---' •,/ ter-- ?--- \ ? ? .?,'?' ? A, ' .-, 1 ? ?I
40
a.>
'AID #
\_ --? L/?`? ?..,. / Caleb Creek Properties LLC
? 342N Elm Stree
t Ste. 6
L! / Greensboro
, NC 27401
Sheet of
i
4?5
/ loa :c
44
f ? ? tt
i 1
NMI
`? " ....
gar
N?' Mm Street Ste 6
a
NG'27401
4
(lpv,cc:)) Sc-zo l(vo-i-? l l-lia(cl )
AWX ?.1 Ac
?---- RECEIVED
DEC 2005
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
EdMkVWsdoW

SM3am Recto adon
5102 Unear Feet

F
t
zvf?4 B3

LL El C, 9 P V
1 171
_ a t 2 0 0 5 2
},?'y;
Wetland and Natural Resource ?'r• "
Consultants, Inc. ?. ?..,
November 21, 2005
US Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: Mr. John Thomas
6508 Falls of Neuse Road, Ste 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
Mr. Thomas:
aa I-= ??odlgD
NOV 2 3 2005
DENR - WATER QUAUTY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER 6RANtdH
Attached is an application for an individual permit to construct a golf course as part of a residential
development. All of the following information is available in digital format and will be forwarded to
you as an email attachment.
Location
The project, Caleb's Creek Subdivision, is approximately 939 acres in size and is located on both
sides of Teague Lane (SR 2630), approximately 5 miles south of Kernersville, in Forsyth County, NC.
Portions of the project include land that was previously developed as Pine Tree Lakes Golf Course
and the balance of the project is comprised of forestland and pastureland. Coordinates (in decimal
degrees) for the site are 36.0668° North, 80.0923° West. The site contains Abbotts Creek and
several unnamed tributaries of the Yadkin River and approximately 16 acres of adjacent wetlands in
the Yadkin River Basin (8-Digit Cataloging Unit 03040103).
Existing Site Conditions
The land use in the area surrounding the project consists of single family housing, forested tracts,
and agricultural tracts. The area is currently subject to increasing residential pressure.
The land use on the project itself consists of an existing golf course, which totals about 30% of
project area, open agricultural fields, which total 40%, and forested areas, which total
approximately 30%. The site contains several small perennial streams that flow into Abbotts Creek,
which also flows north to south through the western portion of the property. There are
approximately 16 acres of wetlands and approximately 22 acres of ponds located throughout the
property. The site includes several small ponds situated on and around the existing golf course that
provide irrigation water and stormwater control.
Applicant's Stated Purpose
As stated by the applicant, the purpose of the project is to develop a residential community,
including a school, and redevelop an existing golf course.
Newton Office Clyde Office
PO Box 224 wnrinc.com 217 Paragon Parkway, # 142
Newton, NC 28658 Clyde, NC 28721
828-465-3035 828-648-8801
828-465-3050 Fax 1' 828-648-8802 Fax

Project Description
The project consists of the construction of a residential community that impacts regulated Waters
of the US for the construction of roads, sewer lines, a school site, and dam maintenance and
rehabilitation. Impacts to Waters of the US will result from piped road crossing that access high
ground, wetland and stream impacts needed for golf facilities, open trench cuts for installation of
sewer facilities, and impacts associated with the development of a school site.
Development of the site will require clearing for the proposed road right of ways, piping for the
proposed road crossings, impacts associated with the construction of sewer line crossings, and
grading for the proposed golf course. Heavy equipment, including graders, pan scrapers, excavators,
bull dozers, etc. will be used for the construction of the project. Completion of the proposed
project will require the piping of several streams for the construction of 12 road crossings: 8
crossing result from the construction of thoroughfare roads and 4 are necessary to access high
ground within the subdivision. The proposed impacts to streams channels resulting from the
placement of fill material associated with road crossings is 1506 linear feet for thoroughfare road
and 687 linear feet for internal roads. Impacts to Waters from the construction of roads total
1.14 acres of open water to construct a causeway and 0.76 acres of wetlands. Sewer line crossings
impact 344 linear feet of streams and 0.042 acres of wetlands. Golf facilities, as proposed, will
impact a total 0.53 acres of wetlands and 1193 linear feet of streams. Grading for recreational
fields will impact 0.201 acres of isolated wetlands. Pond construction and dam rehabilitation will, as
proposed, impact 1.047 acres of wetlands and another 0.257 acres of open waters. Grading
necessary to configure a safe school site and eliminate an attractive nuisance will impact 0.768
acres of pond surface area and 733 linear feet of streams. The applicant proposes to fill 0.991
acres of wetlands associated with grading for lots. Plans included with this notice show the overall
proposed site layout which, if permitted would impact 6903 linear feet of streams, 5.75 acres of
wetlands, and 2.165 acres of open waters.
The applicant proposes to mitigate for permanent impacts to stream channels at a 1:1 ratio, wetland
impacts at a 2:1 ratio, and open water at a 1.1 ratio. Under the proposal 5102 linear feet of stable
stream pattern, profile, and dimension will be restored along unnamed tributaries located within the
existing golf course area. Streams will be permanently protected under a conservation easement
and will be replete with buffers in accordance with local requirements that require 50 foot buffers.
Wetland restoration will occur within approximately 7.1 acres of previously drained wetland areas.
Existing ditches will be plugged with clay barriers and historic wetland areas are expected to
become saturated and inundated. The restoration has the intended consequence of increasing the
wetness of existing wetlands that are adjacent to the restored wetlands. Wetland hydrology is
expected to be enhanced in 4.2 acres. Approximately 2 acres of open water will be created for an
irrigation pond and an additional 0.5 acres of littoral zones are propose along pond i ges,
Figures, Maps, and Attachments
Attached are numerous figures taken from the overall site plan for yo use in the public notice.
The configuration and dimensions of the project prevent the entire site from being clearly depicted
in a single figure. However, the impact figures depict the locations as well as quantify the impacts
that are proposed. Included too are a reduced scale map of the wetland area and wetland
Newton Office Clyde Office
PO Box 224 wndnc.com 217 Paragon Parkway, # 142
Newton, NC 28658 Clyde, NC 28721
828-465-3035 828-648-8801
828-465-3050 Fax [phone] Fax
? L
determination data forms. All of the above impacts are accounted for in a table that clearly
identified the location of the impact plus its dimensions and the proposed mitigation that is
commensurate with typically accepted ratios.
Adjacent Property Owners
Attached is a list of adjacent property owners that was derived from public records. The list is
inclusive of those properties that are adjoining the impacted body of water as well as those that
are adjacent to the project as a whole. The list is being supplied in digital format for notif ication
purposes.
Thank you for your time and consideration and please call me at 828-320-8120 with any questions
that you may have. We expect that a public notice could be released in the near term based on the
information that we are submitting. Do not hesitate to call me if there is any additional information
that you need.
Best regards,
hris Huysman

Cc: Brad Deaton, Land Use Strategies
Cindy Karoly, NC DWQ Central Office
Daryl Lamb, NC DWQ Winston Salem Regional Office
Newton Office
PO Box 224
Newton, NC 28658
828-465-3035
828-465-3050 Fax
Clyde Office
wnrinc.com 217 Paragon Parkway, # 142
Clyde, NC 28721
828-648-8801
3 828-648-8802 Fax
I f
20052116
APPLICATION MR orEi?ARTMENT OF THE ARMY MUT OW APPROVAL Iw. 071040003
M Cfw waA E10iaa Daom*w 31.2004
Ths PArbao bunion for Ok aaMetlen of k0ontadon Y i r s t i n a t a d se at?rap 10 lams per nKwew. Wdwuph dw m *kv of appl, 1, rhaid togrbe
6 hours at iwe. TNe r,dud.. Sri. tin. to. nvi.wM+4 otYn..-oval* o wbft aw souraw 9-d- irq yowl a- I tol fta» do Awa- cowl
aeomPlo iq .ad rowiewip the oeMatlrn of inlatrwdo.. Srtrd oonMnwm r.p.Mfnp t* bunion asttnrtae or airy rther spot of dde e-I ', of
idatnwtlorr. tnekw4oauggsodone ter wdueiig this bwdwu to Deprirwrrt of Dclern.. Waatrirgton tis.dsJuottw. ior.ioP Oi aoeasr.f iM«ra.darr
OF a tierrs and Reports 1216 1 Ill- an D.wts tiphwav. Auias 1204. Atinpwat. VA 2220241302: and to the ONiw tf tegerawrt a W BvdioL
Prpwwpi Reduation Proloat W710-00031. W alfthon, OC 20603. RespwAinto elwiM be swam dw twttwtdroeeedlerg aqr edw pnwwart of Isw. .
to "atoll be wabjtot to any puwky tot foting to coo ptr with a ookc*n of infctnow" If It doe. not A ph V s ownwol wad OMS ooatroi
rrwMw. Mean DO NOT RETURN pm fans to eklwr of ttreee eddrwwe.s CioweimMl appaaWo n nwart bo wubrtdtted to dr. OWbM blgfOeet Mriig
Juriedodoa owor to, be w n of tM pt opoeed ocwwity.
i PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Autfortdow lavers wW tforboro Aar. 2 -oi, 10, 33 tMC 403. Cow water Act, Sw*m 404.33 1,15C 1514. Maritw Ptowwden, R.euatdt and
SooetrerI Aot 33 t*C;1413. Staten 103. Prirotpei Purpoew Inin -dory prowidod on this Norm vA be woad to ewohwaing rho appieodon,ta s
pwndL Reutife Usm This rnfornredwr omy be .1, I with the Deporen ent ei JueeMe and other lederoi. woW mW lewd gowrtorrerrt egerreies.
&*wAv err of regYeetad irbrrrnrttwt Y trokortary. twwae?w. N irdwom olon Y tat provided lire permit eppl, do r oararet bs evolootod aor can a pwadt
be Yeued.
Doe an at otl9' drawirpe a good mpredueide eopYe wlr11bt1 show do bo.aien and thrnoafor of do ixopuwd aodrity nwat be arttoalod a this
app6erkien two aartipis drowtrrgo cod t orsi awd be cuI I--
modylty, w the Otretet EagMuer lrovtry #+ieNbfYw rover the teaotisrt ad tM propeoed
M dw b act ownpleOW is tii wf be ndwMd.

1. APPUCATKM NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. OATS RECEIVED 4. DATE APPUCATION COMKLrTW
gm AM
S. APRJCANTS NAME
t CQG;941 P(?Op - t1 ALL S. AUTHORIZED, AQM*S NAME AND TnU M a- , r act morose
Wt` Nib r1NUA?
6. APPUCANTS ADDRESS
342 1J . LZ-L*A SmGreT SGG
Z-I401 9. AGENTS ADDRESS
O
1 b BX. ZZy
tst: n?rb?1 7- G5
7., AMjCANT!S PHONE tMS. WAREA CODE CODE
a. R.eidwra.
b. essitr«e 33b • 'Z? a. Resid.nc.
b. 9veia.n2 465
11. Y??Y titATEitIENT OF A1111rOMLiTION
I tw*by euthaito, U,-VQV..,I to so M my bchett a my "on In tA. pr.c.ed" d fit oppac.tion wW to
knish. w mn re*w", arppteraorrtet ialao*m in support of Oft pwnak wow"".
APPLICANT'S
DATE
NAME LOCATION NO DaMlIPTION OF PRI-MCY OR MOM
12. PROJECT MW OR TITLE r«moot amen
??? ?ax-
13. NAME OF WATER1100Y, IF KNOWN wamooAW
I'S
14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS rraparreet
iGSD Pave T296 L",*E
18. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Coulm STATE

16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS. It KNOWN. 6w
Vk, MQAP
54h" VGCJS 'T0pMQ>a pI
17. DIRECTION11 TO THE SITE
?Ni(3N C 4 Q 4 501 q lad2STAXIF -4O . l x---T- C" ON
16. baba. Aetivfty )o..,yr.,orrefrrt.teeuetriwn.w
011; '`itE p?C?-'C' 15
?
. ?-2 ??v"a?.
Kx
a
(
? ?E
`
C.oM?MV 1\NCLM"Cl k

emsnwc, Chotrr CoVcse
i
r
19. Fh*apurpos.&usrar.«woorpor•r.?a•~.amknor bowr
p?SCK???2CZ?S OF F-1*-%- PC.i: M
VM5
lb co's \)a ? COj
N
S
C
,
+czG t . ,iuTv?c? ©AkAS, GUM\,?TS vJN cW4L
-
Wt3U
ON
s cSC j?ran lb p k---vs'L6f-l noUr '?PA(,\u ne
m
1Ltt20.22 IF ,R
E
20. Rasonte) fro 04"010
2U&,O+s 1?&E 'Cb P ?cross ?C-?4FC-c?zov???.
t: Feu.
ws\L\Tx1loN tS welmiM Tb ((), AY ' Lv1 W ?M DOA ?Vt?.(\oNs
S %S Tb COmSTIZA-T f6\e QwCr Cov?.SE tits SC?koOl ,
21 TW.%) W M.WW W.0 01.1h gad end th. Arrrourtt of Each Typ. in Cubic Yards
CL'?P?N ?\t.? Nlot'C1?"Ql? NV (,VA?t?t1'C?L-S SPQJ?F\i'D 1? r
22. Surface Ana in Aorat.f W.tlends w Dow Wars FA*d aasrernvow
Ac?E Q P"'O LGNE?W'TS IBS SQ EU Fk6D
23. k Any Portion of the Work Ab ady ConwW*? Yom - Na IF YES. DOOM THE COMPMED WORK
24. Ad*mm of Adjoktin0 Ptoparty Owners. Lassoes. Eta.. Whop. Property Adjoins da Waterbody Of am* Amt am be mowed ors,
pleass attach a auppNaraad Ist). '
UST`
2fi. Ust of Othw Crtllkadww w AppreveWDenieh RWWMW hoar adw Federal. Stsaa or Local AOwtciss for Wank Dwarlbed in This Applaatlert.
AGENCY TYPE AP SOMAL• IDENTIFICATION KLAMBEA DATE APPUEO DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
'1Ai.uld include but is not som to bu?ldrrp pw" percales
2S.' AWcWm Is hereby made for a permit or Woo ft authertus the wok sksefted In Ads appKcWm i m" 1Nttt Ma Mfww *m M Ada
00"di.n Is ooa 0 t and accurate. I ft "W eafdW that i poeaew ft ority to tatdrfaka Ara work dowe" Awab or on recd V as *0
duly hotitad ap?,ttt of . appticanf.
SIGNATURE API 0l?TE SIGNATURE of DATE
rw amft"on a+rrst to *Ped by""rum who do*" to tardsrt.to the ptepaad a vft tsppMarW or It may a I*wd W a duty
authorised "W" it "ststom f in block 11 has ban a" out and MP"
19 U.S.C. S wft n 1001 provides that: Whoavw, in any awrawr witlria tM juriadelion of any drparttwant or "w wy of alto I - ' Stops
knawkt IV and WOW fs 101iw. oerte sb. w osvers up stay via. saorrta, of disquisse a utefatfai faa of fn" any 61166. fic M" Of
*VA &M stown)"m or r p aseeft" or awkas or aae my false yr Ww ar d"nwu kteowinq soma to a0 taltr any f* k Aa "a?
bssrdrdwtt sasanw t or saay, 0" In *%" not taws Awn 010.000 or Mnpkaad rat mere ton $ve yews or WO"
180.1 33333° W I I I I I I I i 80.1000000 W I I( I I i ( I 180.96666661° W I I I j 1 ; ` I j-
-
Z tt >, i ??. n I ..s ?•?' rt- - - n ?a r w,a-' {- ;? ?t t ?{ ..
' 'N ?,. t f i r• 1. 1
pp -wr`J j ?-z
e" Ar
-41
Cl)
1 .` } 4 s G r 'r 7
_4'ffirsx?
.
.
r ? f y ? Ild S}, I.? F?
r ? irr '
?•V ? ..r _ t ,? E ? _ I t ? 1
? i I ti t r J :a \ 1? 1 i.
- a T 1 k' LLUU ?• L ` '` f f? t
Z
top '• i°r f ? `? ? ?} ? ?l . V ? ? ? - ? i?; ?
to
+ 7^
10
t0 r I I ?; -+, ?- f?XXl? o
O Ora I _ l h _ .7^? E { i ,. ` _,(U
Ita-
? _S?e•a -r ? ii -? ,i j ?'• ??0??r } ' r ?•? ?• ? t f % ? ? t- ?r ? ? .?Y'
f1?? a ???? ?c -?t tto. ? I,• i -- ?? ? v:1 ? 'fir d?} ti• -
Z ?? - r tb f ?? I ??_. Z
,? r.J`.
?? _ ?` i /,.,,• .___(1. yY?? ? Vt jt r?? .s `:. ? LY .fit-.•-?i .?'r
•- ? ( r C f J 9:q? _
80.1333333:0WI ( I I I i l i '80.?001000°W 180.666f66fi°W
Name: KERNERSVILLE Location: 036.05989270N 080.0880336* W
Date: 11/3/2005 Caption: Landuse Strategies- Caleb's Creek
Scale: 1 inch equals 4000 feet

x"
k
i
r
l
}e
v

A
Caleb's Creek Impac t 1 able (November 21, 2005 )
Map
Impact
ID Purpose
for Impact Stream
length
(1 1) Wetland
Area Volume
Estimate
cu. d, Impact
Type Proposed
Stream
Mitigation Proposed
Wetland
Mitigation Resource Type
1 sewer 71 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
2 sewer 0 .02 0 cut 0 0 slough WL
3 BMP 515 0 15 fi11 515 0 isolated CH
1 4 recreation 0 0.068 10 fill 0 0.136 isolated WL
5 recreation 0 0.133 20 fill 0 0.266 isolated WL
6 road 242 0 10 pipe 242 0 perennial H
7 golf 0 0.077 10 fill 0 0.154 forested WL
8 sewer 46 0.015 0 cut 0 0 int CH & WL
9 golf 0 0.23 35 fill 0 0.460 forested WL
10 road 286 0.45 80 pipe-fill 286 0900 per CH & WL
11 off 0 0.132 20 fill 0 0.264 forested WL
f 12 golf 1193 0 35 i 1193 0 intermittent CH
1 13 dam 0 0.081 10 fill 0 0.162 forested WL
14 road 336 0 65 i e 336 0 perennial CH
15 pool 100 0 0 dredge 0 0 perennial CH
16 restoration 593 0 0 restore 0 0 perennial CH
17 road 144 0 40 pipe 144 0 perennial CH
18 drives 142 0 20 pipe 142 0 perennial CH
19 road 152 0 40 pipe 152 0 perennial CH
20 sewer 57 0 0 cut 0 0 intermittent CH
1 21 road 360 0 10 pipe 0 0 intermittent CH
22 road 33 0 1 pipe 0 0 intermittent CH
23 road 440 0.133 130 pipe 440 0.266 per CH & WL
24 dam 0 0.257 400 fill 0 0 open water
25 road 0 1.14 1000 fill 0 0 open water
26 road 771 0.177 155 pipe-fill 771 0.354 forested WL
27 and 0 0.33 0 dredge 0 0.66 marsh
1 28 golf 0 0.099 15 fill 0 0.198 see
1 29 school 0 0.768 1000 pipe-fill 0 0 open water
30 school 733 0 155 pipe fill 733 0 perennial CH
31 road 350 0 15 pipe 0 0 intermittent CH
32 road 148 0 40 pipe 148 0 perennial CH
33 and 0 0.649 0 dredge 0 1.298 forested WL
34 lots 0 0.823 550 fill 0 1.646 forested WL
35 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
! 36 sewer 22 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
1 37 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
38 sewer 22 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
39 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
40 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
41 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
42 sewer 0 0.007 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
43 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
44 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
i 45 lots 0 0.108 20 fill 0 0.216 forested WL
46 lots 0 0.060 15 fill 0 0.12 forested WL
impacts 6903' 5.757 3916 5102 7.1 Mitigation

1 14 111111 !

?l
Ca fixes c' f'ra;ex'i 43 tic:

4041,..^,1 L-4v,.fd l ors ut #Ysf3?caYi ah
feu°yh T

Area
Stem Impact-71 if Area 2
,¦.¦„?,K ?.. `aw_--- Wetland Impact-.02 ac
Scale 1: 100 (north
y i3._._._..
-" X
'" - -- `?- _- - x
x
AREA - AED
Caleb Cvek Pmperues ux
342 N Em Sbred SIP- 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
tp 4"Me
i�
J!", w. u i ai
" r
�^pYL�_ p� pp vp�'�8f ags� p�y�'
,; �P6M Y/�a R B ti��iw 4�Y Y RM YY
h
w 17
�Q"
! ' U
.r�
.�M
. (i/
yv
YA
iff
�` d � �� fig."� ���. ...,•^.*� s `� 4 ">�t '°� T� �"� � '� ""s �a.� `gi Y
�
�y ��yS
a,,m JJJ
r
vAr W!
v
�., .m+ "'' q,.+^,,✓� " Z ,! .._;� , r,. w", ✓ t sem".
�'.9.AT �Illllrl
^e "rtI Ia
IF
AID #ry
`� ;.3.� MI* PMPOOM LLC
342 M Elm Sb k St. 0 .
Greensboro. NC 27401
v
�Z

Area 4
Area 5
`. , \ WeVand Impact-.133 ac
1
Area 36
trap Impact- 22 It
ScsIs 1:'1®0 (north-.,,,)
x x
QED
PR
0
18M DX5 ? x
r
AID #
? - ? . - Caleb Creek PMPKUn l.t.C
. ?; - ?N Elm Sh'+9et Ste. 6
. `\ \ ?_-
" ? - - ? Sliest af._
W4.

? i
AJD #
,, ° a ? Caleb Creek Propefts LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
- Sheet of
Area 7
Wetiand Imepct-.077 se
area 33
Stream Impact- 22 If
w \ Sorts 1 : 1 00 (n®rt? -??
M
AID #
Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 REIM
Ste. 6
r
Gmer*Oom, NC 27401
.-? f
Shoet-of
Area 8 -
? ?Stream impact- 40 W
? i Area 42
WsUand ?mpad- DOOM
Sods i a 100 (north
42
x
AID #
- - Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Mm Street Ste. 6
-- Greensboro, NC 27401
- Sheet of
i
.
Area 9
Scale 1.100 (north -.),)

AID #
- -- -- ---
MI,
Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, NC 27409
Street of _,,_
CV Area 10
`'~• i
t \ ?, : 4\ Wetiand Impacts-.451
Stream Impacts- 286 N
-??
Scefle 10100 (north
. - --' AID #
?' f t Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Qrewisboro. NC 27401
Sheet of
; -, Area i i
W(atWnd Om acts- n 13
l ac ?1 a ? GO (nogth
y/I
r AID #
Caleb Creek PmperUes LLC
^` --- -=-- 342 N Elm Stt" Sts. 6
.` ?; ----- -•, Greensboro, NC 27409
:? Sheet, (if

- /7 r -- _
? , f ??`? ? ?' ? ? , ? ? ? ? ? -- ? l ? _ rte.
r
AID #
`''` \ ! ! ?+ Caleb Creels Properties LLC
\ f 342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Gmerisbm, NO 27401
1 t ' Sheet of -
Area ?i 3 t
.068 ac
Scale 1 -0 100 (north
1 ..
i
AID #
Creek Properties LLC
.... _ ? Caleb
/ J 342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
__ ! __-- - - - - . ---/-- Greensboro. NC 27401
?-- Sheet of
--
l / -- M _ - Area 14
Stream Impact- 336 f
l - _ --
Scale 1:100 (nom -??
/f
r:
AID#
cam OM* PMPWOM LLC
342 N Mm Street Ste. B
Greensboro, NC 27401
-- ,? ,,? ,?'' ` ,•'?r -'/ + !_" Suet og _
Area 15-100 ft plum pool
- Stream
Area 16
Resf®rafi®n- 593 If
Area 17m Box CuIvertm i 44W
f
Scds 1:100 (north
f `• 7
l
1
- .- ---- - r ?,? ,?
_ M
/f
AID #
- ? ?•-? Caleb Creek Properdes LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, PAC 27401
r
.-
Street ,,,?,
l `
Area 18
¦ ^ Stream ?mpsct-` 42 N
,,,r, r,n,r ,w Area 1i 9
4?> 1??= Stream ?ma -152 If
Scale ,-

A
?Iv
t ? .
l
AID#
` ` `•, ?' -? Caleb Creek Properties LLC
Y
N
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensbm, NC 27401
SheqK-Of ---
Area 20
?y tl ?8?? oil,ttlp ff
Stream U}° 5 aT1 a
Scais 1 a 1 00 (nom --?
INI
AID #
Caleb Creek Properties LLC
3421 Elm Street Ste. 6
/? - Greermbm, PVC 27401
?. g suet of
?,
7,\

? 7z
AID iebb Creek RmperUm LLC
~- 342 N Elm strut Ste. 6
Gres .27401
Shoet__of
.wti
Area 23
Stream Impact- 440 If
Area 24
i
Open Water Fill- .257 ac
Scale 1:100 (north -?
71
-- Z7--'
AID #
-'
;- --- / Caleb Creek Properties lLC
342 N Elm SUW Ste. B
NC 27401
Area 25
Open Water doll IJ4 ac
Area 26
Steam 1mepctm M W
Wetland Imapt- . 177 ac
n _ .
Scale 1:100 (north
NIT
-t
x
US
?' =J AID #
.
Caleb C4eek ProperUes LLc
,J 342 N Elm Street Ste. S
Greensboro, NC 27401
?: - Sheet-of
,,,_.
Area 27
Dredging a .33 ac
Area 28
Scale i o 100 (norb -?
rIrC
-71 AID#
?, --?
Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
/? Greensboro, NC 27401
a r area 29
O h Water FHI- .786 ac
.
mea 3�
v�
Stream Imapd-.73 0f
-100 (h deth,
YjJ�... "^� .° �w i3 RF www" wa
ur,a
vVi
M' r �*N ",.d mra. :r� �.^ a�j�a�:*nw^�•�,�` �-^'*,"," �" :;:. .n .. �, �;� �� 47 � A,;. c � � ,' " ry ,; �, � w i
"'
Y� �rc.,w•a^�.,* `amw S„�„�,.-- a e+.�.a`x�a . r. \\\ d�'� rd a �� � ""�� �°"+i� "� , ° � �"t„��^� �' �5�. J' �";as,R;, � �a o W�! ,'
s a �
i
..
41,
"' '� �A" ,»,..�'�+,�' ""� • .i;. �
a
uw, '�"^ ��, �y� "�' �+� ,�„.. ' "" �, �'""„" �. ;"a 1,, q ��"4' �a ,� H"^.„wrsra>3� P, #:,� � m9h ,x"r", '�w ^"� j�n".�?«„rn~��"a, '�',✓..d ? ."'`""f?A. �""'� \i y.� s�:
�-
" ry_•,.w".: �"mn� as R� d:� a sr^�d"".d` � "r�.." �' \ M*'i r`°�"�rcw���y ��� �+w,�� �`�� •`�,. 'a �, F .�.:
�..�„�y2. .rv;.✓. b'* ..
—32
c
," ^ . f Nr�•+N.,pq..: ' �'.'" su x, rS ✓xN+^ .�, ° rS rnr mF' m*e a„w•w.,�\�1, ” "^;`a„ NY�:"'Me ids •, ,�: x.F. P' s \\\ P'% F
q,'* �' 0:" `d "gip Pd 1.. 444•
°
„ti""
p, "^'� � r ,. .•,� a� � � ✓.�"*�. , ;a � � a�# 4 r •� b, � t� �� � w� �` , '�:"„� \ t+. � �� �"+: � y,�M'x m'm„„ � \;:,,�'A+�"� � "�a•.
..e.„ F w'i r ,�a;., t ` .r" ,"T"p; .:°y. ," a.P5 A”'
``+.,, \ +1 `•,`" < `'
+.,
xx
It
a+:" 1a ;;. ,,r„":."r ✓ "'a' we4', „b`�.,�_ 4 ---...., �rP^ '��' ��; 4r `a \ a dk e"*" a«e`^r•:�' '"a¢° r �,,,
a
eJ
�Ca„„Uo "t-0
ate*" ar""r.• ,,.
�\
" s°'N dwd mae. w y"w`" cw„����" N , '`e y „ " \° a• tC�^`"w. a„ .. ,,°m°.m""t "dr
1
4o';
o
AID /►, �/� #
" an3 a ✓r "+aa9 �+ xqw,•• " " m � wPk �"3."' "ad + ''lanm _
U14' r r�'' �„j ' �i r+f` rr .�:
.: CreekPtopertlas
^6°.
342 M Eh
C 27401
—�

Area 31
Stream 0Mpsc ts- 350 ff
Scdo I-IGO (north
.._.... M ? may,.
A J(
t
1
}- wo #
Caleb Creek Pry LLC
342 N Ekn Street Ste. 6
u.
` >< Gfeensbao NC 27401
V,
u
Area 32
/ stream ?m acN-148 of
S ae 1 p 100 (north

/
/
Ali #
Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
AA , A Sheet_
Area 33-
ToW Pond Area- 1.55 ac
egand Dredging-.649
Scale 1:100 (wth
--?-
? T
1
i
AID #
-- _ -- _ \ w-i ,-? Caleb Creek Pmpertlss LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
____ . - •? Greensboro, NC 27401
. Sheet
.
all.
Area 34
W®t!
6and Impact-.823 ac Area _, Stream Impact- 21 If
Scale i:iCO (north
?. x x
f
9
x

X
1
X
x
1
i
I ? ? Y j)g1pl??\
Sim Impacts- 21 If
' - _ Area 41
Stream ?mpact- 21 If
S
cale 1:100 (north -? ?
-7 1,41
x
?, : _` .,.,ter-•_•-...`?' ---_ ? ? ,
AID #
342 N Elm Sheet Ste. 6
Gmwisbm, NC 27401
Sheet of
Area 43
---- "' Stream Impact 21 ff
- r Ares
21
- Stream lma
pct
Scale i:100 (north
,r
i ?
s
4F
X
?
x 1111) - .? -- 1
X ailj
x
r°
F 11
`. ;
AID #
Caleb Creek Pr+opertles LLC
342 M Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
"
f
}ddl ??
Area 45
- Wetland lmpae-.108 ac
41ft Area 46
x - -a?- Wetland lmpac?m .060 ac
- `? Scala I : i DD (north
A IN
> J
// --- - ---- /// / , AID
Caleb Creek Properties LLc
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
I
Shed - of -

F
1
Stream Restorato"On
Mustrat'Obn
pprox 0000 X10 300
Exiting Stream
EM7 Wetland
SOILS
page 2 DF 1
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Wehadkee Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): (We) TWic Fluvaguents Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ? No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munseli Moist) (Munseli Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0„-1 A IOYR 6/1 / clay loam
1-12 B ?.SYR 6/6 / loam

/

/

Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
• Histic Epipedon 0 High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor 0 Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
p Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
O Gieyed or Law-Chroma Colors 0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ?
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ? No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes ® No ?
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes ? No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: Calcb's Creek Date: July 05, 2005
Applicant t Owner: Landuse Strategies County: Fors h
Investigator: Housman State: North Carolina
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes ® No ? Community ID:Bottom of
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes El No ® tow slo
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes D No o Transect ID:
(explain on reverse if needed) Plot ID:DF2
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species ndkat r S rat Dominant Plant Species Indicat Stratum
1. Impatiens capensis FACW herb 9.
2. Eulalia viminea FAC+ herb 10.
3. Sagittaria latitolia OBL herb 11.
4. Fraxinus pennsylvanica FACW tree 12.
5. Liquidambar styraciflua FAC+ tree 13.
6. 14.
7• 16.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
? Other ? Inundated
? Saturated in Upper 12"
No Recorded Data Available ? Water Marks
® Drift Lines
Field Observations: 0 Sediment Deposits
? Drainage Patterns In Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: n/a (in.) Secondary Indicators:
® Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: n/a in.) ? Water-Stained Leaves
? Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: nla (in.) ? FAC-Neutral Test
? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
page 2 DF 2
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla Drainage Class: Somewhat noorIv drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): (Ch) Flukaguentic Dystrochrepts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes E] No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
cinches) Horizon JMunsell Moist) (Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6 A 5YR 5/4 ! clay loam
6-12 B 7.5YR 4/2 / clay loam

I

l

/
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol 0 Concretions
* Histic Epipedon 0 High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
® Suifidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime 0 Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
? Reducing Conditions 0 Listed on National Hydric Soils List
® Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors p Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ?
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes ® No ?
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes Z No ?
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: Caleb's Creek Date: July 05, 2005
Applicant / Owner: Land Use Strategies County: Forsyth
Investigator: Housman State: North Carolina
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes ® No ? Community ID:bottom of
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes E] No M tow stone
is the area a potential problem area? Yes E] No Z Transect ID:
(explain on reverse if needed) Plot ID:Data Form 3
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species indicator rat Dominant Plant Species Indicator Stratum
1. Eulaffa viminea FAC+ herb
I 9.
2. impatiens capenis FACW herb 14.
3. Ulmus rubra FAC tree ll.
4. Liquidambar styraciflua FAC+ tree 12.
S. 13.
6, 14.
7. 15.
$, 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
? Other ? Inundated
? Saturated in Upper 12"
No Recorded Data Available ? Water Marks
® Drift Lines
Field Observations: ® Sediment Deposits
? Drainage Patterns In Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: n1a (in.) Secondary Indicators:
® Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: n/a in.) ? Water-Stained Leaves
? Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: n/a (in.) ? FAC-Neutral Test
? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Relic oxidation (root channels)
SOILS
page 2DF3
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Wehadkee Drainage Class: Somcwhat Dourly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): (We) Topic 171twaquents Confirm Mapped Type? Yes [] No
E!rofile Descriplion:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundancelContrast Structure, etc.
004 10YR 6/3 / clay loam
4-12 5YR 7/8 / sand

1

Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol 0 Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content In Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor O Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime 0 Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
• Reducing Conditions p Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gieyed or Low-Chroma Colors 0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ?
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No []
Hydric Soils Present? Yes ? No
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes ? No
Remarks:
Page 1
Calebs_creek_Neighbors_Alpha(1).xis
Name Tax Pin Address
2011
6873
85 521 Farm Creek Road
TM
1 Adkins, Charles H -
- Kernersville, NC 27284
2 Allen
Judith H 6873-86-6462 7485 Watkins Ford Road
, NC 27284
Kernersville
,
3 Allen, Timothy M 6874-87-7786 1600 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284 t -
t ?

1349 South Park Dr.

k _
4 Arbor Development Corp 6874-95-9248 ill
NC 27284
K R
ernersv
e, ?J
1 ?'

5
Blackburn, Christopher Trustee
6874-47-1077
1245 Glenview Drive
NC 27284
Kernersville

?t 4
, ? -
6 Blackburn
James S 6873-88-1032 7471 Watkins Ford Road
?
IV' }
r? 1
, Kernersville, NC 27284 f
7491 Watkins Ford Road '
7 Blythe, Joe C 6873-86-7839 Kernersville NC 2728 4`
8 Bodenhamer, Norris Tuttle 6873-85-2642
7460 Watkins Ford Road
NC 27284
ill
K
ernersv
e,
9 Bowen, Fred J 6874-87-7357 1606 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284
1589 Union Cross Road t
10 Boyles
Robert H 6874-26-9337
, Kernersville, NC 27284
11 Burton, Richard Leon 6874-88-9514 1546 Teague Lane Kernersville, NC 27284

12
Curtis W
Campbell
6873-69-1501 4519 Kemersville Road
` b
-
, Kernersville, NC 27284 _ 'rte
13 Chamelin, Billy Lawrence
y 6873-57-5501 1604 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284 t -

14
Chamelin, Charles Eugene
6873-67-2648
Lane
1944 Teague
Kernersville, NC 27284

€
Page 2
Calebs creek_Neighbors Alpha(1).xis
15 Chamelin, Coy Smith 6873-68-4510 1920 Teague Lane j E
Kernersville, NC 27284
16 Chamelin
Jerald 6873-68-5108 1930 Teague Lane
, Kernersville, NC 27284
17 Chamelin, Michael Ray 6873-67-5901 1936 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284

_ _

18
Chamelin, Bobby L 6874-72-1975 1740 Teague Lane t I
6874-73-2170 Kernersville, NC 27284

19
Elliott
Barbara S
6874-76-9669 1670 Pone Tree Drive
t
, Kemersville, NC 27284
20 Friesen, Leo R 6874-97-7693 108 Havenstraat Street
Kernersville, NC 27284
P
----------.__
- -
21 Fulk, Hines E Jr. 6874-97-5674 106 Havenstraat Street
Kernersville, NC 27284
_
22 Garcia, Jose J 6874-89-6419 1525 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 272$4 I
23 George, Gary 6874-57-6980 5975 Hedgecock Road
Kernersville, NC 27284

24 Gibbons
Donald G 6873-86-4310 7475 Watkins Ford Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284 €
25 Grogan
Eugene Stuart 6874-97-3686 104 Havenstraat Street
,
Kernersville, NC 27284 - ??
26 Hart
Sandra L 6874-71-2665 1815 Teague Lane i
, Kernersville, NC 27284
27 Haynes, Jerry D 6874-88-9879 1530 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284 I
EE
27 Fay H
Hedgecock 6874-60-3700 5966 Hedgecock Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284
-
29 Hedgecock, Ivey Clay 6874-51-5940 925 Hedgecock Road
P
NC 27284
ernersville,
Page 3
Calebs_creek Neighbors_Alpha(1).xls
30 Hedgecock, Penny Smith 6874-75-2732 1676 Pine Tree Drive

4
l
72
NC
? t
Trustee Kernersvil
e,
2
8 €

31
Hedgecock, Ralph E 6874-41-8966 5961 Hedgecock Road
i
6874-51-2865 Kernersville, NC 27284

32 Hedgecack, Ralph Edwards Jr. 6874-51-8869 5979 Hedgecock Road

Kernersville, NC 272$4
F

33
Richard T
Hedgecack
6874-87-7201 1358 Rock Barn Road #
, Kernersville, NC 27284
34 Jackson, Ophelia 6874-36-8008 1182 Glenview Drive
Kernersville, NC 27284

35
Bill D
Katsis
6873-99-0980 7493 Watkins Ford Road
f
, Kernersville, NC 27284

36 Addie Lillian
Lane 6874-43-5792 5930 Loradale Drive
, Kernersville, NC 27284

37 Lane
Frankie Ray 6874-43-1819 5911 Loradale Drive
, Kernersville, NC 27284 I i

38 John W
Lane 6874-61-1868 5983 Hedgecock Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284
39 Lane, Roy Anthony 5901 Loradale Drive
Kernersville, NC 27284

N D
l
J 5510
6873
66
Teague Lane
1972

?
40 r.
Lauten,
e
bert -
- K
ern
ernersville, NC 27284
i
41 Lauten
Noah D 6873-66-4311 7365 Watkins Ford Road _
, Kernersville, NC 27284
42 Lauten, Shirley Mae 6873-66-7179 7405 Watkins Ford Road
Kernersville, NC 27284
43 Lewis, Thomas R 6874-89-7069 Po Box 816
Kernersville, NC 27285
44 LGS !NC 6874-87-8926 101 Charlois Blvd.
Winston Salem, NC 37103

Page 4
Calebs_creek Neighbors_Aipha(1).xis

45
David P
Matthews
6873-69-4332 1910 Teague Lane
;
, Kernersville, NC 27284 E

46 Matthews
Velma 6873-67-2110 Route i Box 202
?
, East Bend, NC 27018
__.---------- ____-__.
47 McEntire
Kay S 6874-46-8468 1250 Glenview Drive
, Kernersville, NC 27284

48
McNamara, Archie U
6874-51-4819
5937 Hedgecock Road
Kernersville, NC 27284 1
49 Nichols, Duanna A 6874-88-8150 1580 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284

50
Parrish
G Norman
6874-87-6042 1620 Teague Lane
, Kernersville, NC 27284
51 Pearman, Cecil Jr. 6874-72-1705 1750 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284 fI£

52 PM Development LLC PO Box 5323
Winston Salem, NC 27113
i

53 Reel, Goldis S 6874-97-1637 102 Havenstraat Street
Kernersville, NC 27284 ! 1

54 Reid, Gary David 6873-69-4155 1900 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284
{
55 Sanders, John W Jr. 6884-07-0610 110 Havenstraat Street
Kernersville, NC 27284
_
56 Sapp, R Scott 6874-88-9686 1540 Teague Lane
4
Kernersville, NC 2728
57 Schooifield, Robert M 6874-60-5241 1850 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284

J
58 Hobert
Scott 6873-69-5242 1860 Teague Lane
, Kernersville, NC 27284 s
59 Scott, Tony 6874-60-5055 1856 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284

Page 5
Calebs creek_Neighbors Alpha(i).xls
60 Secretary of Veterans Affairs
y 6874-89-9099 251 Main Street N
Winston Salem, NC 27155
j i
61 Shultz, Linda S 6874-27-7448 1136 Glenview Drive
Kernersville, NC 27284

62
Smith
James F
6873-85-4818 7472 Watkins Ford Road
, Kernersvifle, NC 27284

63
Smith
Luther H Jr. 6884-07-6532 112 Havenstraat Street
, 6$84-07-1598 Kernersville, NC 27284
64 Smith
Mary G 6874-34-3527 5875 Loradale Drive
, 6874-32-4606 Kernersville, NC 27284

65
Shannon
Stubbs
6874-27-9628 1349 AmyLee Trail
i t
, Kernersville, NC 27284 !
1560 Teague Lane
66 Taylor, Bernard H 6874-88-8284 Kernersville, NC 27284

67 Tucker
Carol I 4345 High Point Road {
, Kernersville, NC 27284
_.-.-____._ ---------

68
VanHorn
John E
6874-88-7871 1544 Teague lane
, Kernersvipe, NC 27284
69 Weavil
J Howard 6873-74-6870 4685 High Point Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284

___._.__
--------------
70 Whicker, Leo O Jr. 6874-93-5699 841 Silver Dapple Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284
I

71 Willard
Joseph W Trustee 6874-72-0563 1754 Teague Lane
, Kernersville, NC 27284
72 Williams, Robert E 6874-88-8490 1550 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284

?
73 Winnie Pauline
Williams 6874-72-0431
1760 Teague lane
f
,
- Kernersville, NC 27284 _
74 WS Forsyth County Board of 685-70-9172 PO Box 2513
l
NC 27102
S s
Education Winston
em,
a
A
TM
t
ren
, d ? a?a z LI

Wetland and Natural Resource
Consultants, Inc.
November 21, 2005
US Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: Mr. John Thomas
6508 Falls of Neuse Road, Ste 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
Mr. Thomas:
p@20wq
NOV 2 3 2005
DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Attached is an application for an individual permit to construct a golf course as part of a residential
development. All of the following information is available in digital format and will be forwarded to
you as an email attachment.
Location
The project, Caleb's Creek Subdivision, is approximately 939 acres in size and is located on both
sides of Teague Lane (SR 2630), approximately 5 miles south of Kernersville, in Forsyth County, NC.
Portions of the project include land that was previously developed as Pine Tree Lakes Golf Course
and the balance of the project is comprised of forestland and pastureland. Coordinates (in decimal
degrees) for the site are 36.0668° North, 80.0923° West. The site contains Abbotts Creek and
several unnamed tributaries of the Yadkin River and approximately 16 acres of adjacent wetlands in
the Yadkin River Basin (8-Digit Cataloging Unit 03040103).
Existing Site Conditions
The land use in the area surrounding the project consists of single family housing, forested tracts,
and agricultural tracts. The area is currently subject to increasing residential pressure.
The land use on the project itself consists of an existing golf course, which totals about 30% of
project area, open agricultural fields, which total 40%, and forested areas, which total
approximately 30%. The site contains several small perennial streams that flow into Abbotts Creek,
which also flows north to south through the western portion of the property. There are
approximately 16 acres of wetlands and approximately 22 acres of ponds located throughout the
property. The site includes several small ponds situated on and around the existing golf course that
provide irrigation water and stormwater control.
Applicant's Stated Purpose
As stated by the applicant, the purpose of the project is to develop a residential community,
including a school, and redevelop an existing golf course.
Newton Office Clyde Office
PO Box 224 wnrinc.com 217 Paragon Parkway, # 142
Newton, NC 28658 Clyde, NC 28721
828-465-3035 828-b48-8801
828-465-3050 Fax [phone] Fax
tiF4 J P

lrrv's r.;K'?•a
Project bescription
The project consists of the construction of a residential community that impacts regulated Waters
of the US for the construction of roads, sewer lines, a school site, and dam maintenance and
rehabilitation. Impacts to Waters of the US will result from piped road crossing that access high
ground, wetland and stream impacts needed for golf facilities, open trench cuts for installation of
sewer facilities, and impacts associated with the development of a school site.
Development of the site will require clearing for the proposed road right of ways, piping for the
proposed road crossings, impacts associated with the construction of sewer line crossings, and
grading for the proposed golf course. Heavy equipment, including graders, pan scrapers, excavators,
bull dozers, etc. will be used for the construction of the project. Completion of the proposed
project will require the piping of several streams for the construction of 12 road crossings: 8
crossing result from the construction of thoroughfare roads and 4 are necessary to access high
ground within the subdivision. The proposed impacts to streams channels resulting from the
placement of fill material associated with road crossings is 1506 linear feet for thoroughfare road
and 687 linear feet for internal roads. Impacts to Waters from the construction of roads total
1.14 acres of open water to construct a causeway and 0.76 acres of wetlands. Sewer line crossings
impact 344 linear feet of streams and 0.042 acres of wetlands. Golf facilities, as proposed, will
impact a total 0.53 acres of wetlands and 1193 linear feet of streams. Grading for recreational
fields will impact 0.201 acres of isolated wetlands. Pond construction and dam rehabilitation will, as
proposed, impact 1.047 acres of wetlands and another 0.257 acres of open waters. Grading
necessary to configure a safe school site and eliminate an attractive nuisance will impact 0.768
acres of pond surface area and 733 linear feet of streams. The applicant proposes to fill 0.991
acres of wetlands associated with grading for lots. Plans included with this notice show the overall
proposed site layout which if permitted would impact 6903 linear feet of streams, 5.75 acres of
wetlands, and 2.165 acres of open waters.
The applicant proposes to mitigate for permanent impacts to stream channels at a 1:1 ratio, wetland
impacts at a 2:1 ratio, and open water at a 1.1 ratio. Under the proposal 5102 linear feet of stable
stream pattern, profile, and dimension will be restored along unnamed tributaries located within the
existing golf course area. Streams will be permanently protected under a conservation easement
and will be replete with buffers in accordance with local requirements that require 50 foot buffers.
Wetland restoration will occur within approximately 7.1 acres of previously drained wetland areas.
Existing ditches will be plugged with clay barriers and historic wetland areas are expected to
become saturated and inundated. The restoration has the intended consequence of increasing the
wetness of existing wetlands that are adjacent to the restored wetlands. Wetland hydrology is
expected to be enhanced in 4.2 acres. Approximately 2 acres of open water will be created for an
irrigation pond and an additional 0.5 acres of littoral zones are proposed along pond edges.
Figures, Maps, and Attachments
Attached are numerous figures taken from the overall site plan for your use in the public notice.
The configuration and dimensions of the project prevent the entire site from being clearly depicted
in a single figure. However, the impact figures depict the locations as well as quantify the impacts
that are proposed. Included too are a reduced scale map of the wetland area and wetland
Newton Office Clyde Office
PO Box 224 wnrinc.com 217 Paragon Parkway, # 142
Newton, NC 28658 Clyde, NC 28721
828-465-3035 828-648-8801
828-465-3050 Fax [phone] Fax
determination data forms. All of the above impacts are accounted for in a table that clearly
identified the location of the impact plus its dimensions and the proposed mitigation that is
commensurate with typically accepted ratios.
Adjacent Property Owners
Attached is a list of adjacent property owners that was derived from public records. The list is
inclusive of those properties that are adjoining the impacted body of water as well as those that
are adjacent to the project as a whole. The list is being supplied in digital format for notification
purposes.
Thank you for your time and consideration and please call me at 828-320-8120 with any questions
that you may have. We expect that a public notice could be released in the near term based on the
information that we are submitting. Do not hesitate to call me if there is any additional information
that you need.
Best regards,
hris Huysman

Cc, Brad Deaton, Land Use Strategies
Cindy Karoly, NC DWQ Central Office
Daryl Lamb, NC DWQ Winston Salem Regional Office
Newton Office
PO Box 224
Newton, NC 28658
828-465-3035
828-465-3050 Fax
Clyde Office
wnrinc.com 217 Paragon Parkway, # 142
Clyde, NC 28721
828-648-8801
3 828-648-8802 Fax
2 0 0 5 2 1 1 6
APPUCATiON FOR DEPARTMENT OF Tl* ARMY PERMST OW APPROVAL NO.O
/JS CM 42Si ink" Daoaadnr 31.2004 ..
The Pubk burden for Oda adleoMn of imAwmat on is aatabrratad b wamp 10 Gomm per ra.pmw. Wdwuor Ua na*ItY of pow- -1 d*dd mwAm
S !aura or Mee. This kniudw do Orin for review kobuodw s. naroMnO,11.141 ddta od?drow. owd 110 end rdrebrtair 1 the dads twde it, and
e.arpMdkg and r.na - I 1Ma solo den of amfanvwd m. Sad eadwn«ru r.0- M w this burden oatintrme tw any odor aepeet of delis aaitaed , of
bdornw d o om bwkxft argpwd- Uw r.dumhV ddb burdeu to D"wo ant o f D.luw. W m h b g t w t H"d*mwm 'W n, m. I MmrraSar of talonrratierr
Operators and Repoeta. 1115 JaNarmad Davis Hl wMN. Sutra 1204. Adrgwft VA 22202.4302: and to the t?Rea tf and M1dWL
no pwaon *AN bad a 6jW to arpr pnuity for idkq to oarvdy whh a ooNr? c*m of Mshmid be orwa? N dace rat di ph ? a owtondW ? OW ao a ?•
dw nbw. AemM DO NOT MKTt Mt yam farad to ekhor of Oros. addrmmwa. Canipbgd appSoedons wom be odxrdttsd to the Doubt bide Mob
Miediedon am to', oarder of do proposd motlstty.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
AudwWm M i- ad i mrbaa AaL Sfttion 10.33 USC 403: Ceea Watw Aat, Ssadon 104.33 tXC 1344: M - ' Probation . Raaaarob and
Saaatoertra AaL 33 USC 1413, Swdan 103. Pikalpmt Purpose: krtadw - dow pvvided on dda tmm wN be woad In ovduadmg do appiaa lon.for a
pwni, Rnnka Usm The kdenew bn army be sirmssd with the Dapwtmwlt of .AMw mad odw federat, admisk and bad Sevenarwnt dgertsMs
sub domm" of r.eprseeed tnbdwwrdsn Is vokommovy. lawmvas. N odermadon b not providN Ow poem +It apploodam.erred be mw homd men am m pomdt
tke
One set at - 19luat bawler fM w Seo4 rrpadusabb .epee wa Ocher dw kromden and thmrraw of do propuwd mdvk, runt be mttaatad 10
rP1 ham amrple -6 1 9 and k ianoodwrl and be wbw 11 to >M Dildi.t Ergknmr hmft Pmbdtadaa over Ow (eeMis m of the pa,
awinlt? An appaaadt.n *set M met oanpMUd im fus w N be fwbwrdad. --

1. APPLICATION NO.
2. FELD OFFICE CODE comim
3. DATE RECENED
4. DATE APPUCATKON COMPLETED
BYA
5. APPUCAMM NAME
6A? CQ6- ~. mp - no& S. tAU?T,HOT1182EwDwA`GENT'S NAAM EAND TITLE en.owr o ner.wMal
VW' V'?vv.3 AUAL Q9Z&Q,!Ls C&
0. APPUCANT'S ADDRESS
342 t l . L-a*A SM=T sMG
C-t o t4c -?-4 fl. AGENT'S ADDRESS
rU boy. 2241
NCkriTU Z ?S
? AFFUCAHI!S PHOW& "QS, WIAHEA CODE
7 W AGOWS PHONE W)S, MARIA CODE
.
a. Rnidwrea
b. 9uakraas , • So- i t t a. Redden:at
b. &wn.aw g2 465• 3035
_t_L.- STATEMENT OF AUTIfO[i)'?!T1tlN ----
1 a+wabr mudrori:.. ??:?.. ? ? to att b mry bshaif a. rely .Sant to Ora procaeskg del tl+ie sppiksdorr and to
firnilk upon request. supplananni vd* madon in support of to permit off"dw.
g/. 1./, / (?,,,hrl _ ®m hi /11
APPUCAWS
DATE
NAME. LOCATION AND DfPTION OF WARCT 00 W"Y"
12. PROJECT NAM! 00 TITIE ow Rana -w
Go-lvo > cmjae -
13. NAME OF WAT6000Y. IF KNOW N iYgr*AW
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
L?OUNTY? STATE
14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS
16S© PINE TWE t,AAXE

10. OTHER LOCATION DESCNPTIONS. IF KNOWN. w.ebowmrw?
'GC7 p%MV AAs""Qj ?C?S 'tD?'Ot'??tz?a.P b4•l C MAP
i ¦ rrw+•??¦¦?r ?r.?rrrrw?rr?¦??.r??
17. DUIECTIONS TO THE SITE 1 1
golds CWT QS?c4 Sow ?'T' c? g0. W QN
LAN0.
10. Nalwa of Ae1" W.Kov erDe1ru. suet u r &now `? ?, .?`?A.L
INAS V UQPCG E o? -? pi?ttT is TO ? ?
C,pM?MV? WiCL?i'Qk"t1 Pr ??-
emsTwc-, c-X0LX- Covcse .
19. Project purpose homev ow,. w or pro" d a. P. . a.
96 Poa,IUTAXt VA,'r^S/ GUMW,?TS W c -s OM WQU tWCOL
s cSC ?? 'ta p ? Ew?P "tour ?t\ u f 1 DES
76F nu?tt eU r saATl/rl?t M to e! OfStliAiltMD_ -
E Ac2tR 2b221F DREDOBl AN
2O. fMsonW for Dbeharpa tJlrCl jr?A'2•? ? ? t? t?"tl4C-c'Qav?v?.
va.` tJ WC-MiM To fwh L.\A W tip(' WA te4ut?(`IoNS, VAL
w\ ttow
wsc3?t,?
?S N S ?'l tb GuNSc?2v?t' ft (,au= WvesE r.'+vts Scyvam"
21. Typeb) of Me%" 9ain@ Discharged and the Mount of Eech Two in Cubic Yards
22. Surface Am in Acres of Wodrds at Otter Wags filled a.rtiwu*&w
ACS-6?Q R?`? (,?1C11kT5 1? .SPA..\??
23. Is Any fbrtim of Ow Work Alreedy Complete? Yes No Ps IF YES, DESCMU THE COAIPL M wow
24. 1lddrswn of Adjoinina Property Owners. Looses. Em. Whose Properly Adjoins the Watwbodir {!f more then em be mw*d hero,
pies" attseit a rwpplMmnd W4. '
.51-e pm+CV'D US'r
25. List of Other Cw0ftesons or Awov&WDwdok Received Rem other FWwol. Stew or Local Aomles for Work DwoelbW in This Appilamam
AGENCY TYPE APP OVAL• IDENTWICATON NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
' include but is not mmicled to t
29. Appksdm is hereby made for t permit or parwao to wtwriw dw Work eiasaribad in thb wacaden. 1 ow" dat tits infarmaden in tfds
4Vbc"- is oomploto and accurate. R ftatlar twit ?hit I possm tla to tndartako Uuo work described herein or ern be ft as the
duly hmised aouert Of • eppdeant.
SKiNA7UAE i-m ? - OATS to mATUM OF DATE
The 40104astim must be shoed by to person who de irm to undrrtiko rite propaed aejtlwty IappNoer?t) er k Wray he *pod by i duy
WANdsed ipant It 00 stoaetwrt in Meek 11 hw been head out and
sipad.
19 U.S.C. Secdm 1001 pmvWm Chit: Whoww, M my wAnnw 11" #0 jUriedCdart of wry depwtmw* or ap wo of tits Undid $too
bwwindy and WAY fateifiss, ooncoals. or covers up any aiol, sdanti. or dapjhm s w4jpW led w nk*n OW feisi. fAdg trs W
*au wwd stmmwm or m rwsiftIl rx or moiws or roses any fdae "mm or dwwttsnt krtowbtp amps to .0 tsh any fda. Aolitimw w
ftauduie d ssswewtb er array, shall be fined not come Ilan 410,000 er beprisorAd not taaro than Zvi years ar bill
180.133 3 W 1 I I I I 80.100Q000? w. i I I i i l l ? 8° 4? 6 °'" ? !
--
Tk'?
r 7•. f l ? 1, yc.' ? ? <? "Ir. [ S{yyr ( ? ?w i ?T
?s'€, y ?r? •'? ?? _ _ +f? y ?!> A??t? ` a 1 ?? r, ' 1 .i t ¦ v Z
14
_ ! a"- ?? - - ??? 1. ?. ? ? ???`'?? ?• ? ?`'???? ? A?
N
', .
t0 fC
! 3 1 ? ! 1 t I ?. ? f?
,,4
J? r ) A . !? 3.
C Vv
t I
z z
I-t
t:
` y
M I e.
{ ! ` i c n
m
i j ??t •''.i yam. .??.? ?, 1i /? ?3 ?.
! f Grote. _ ?-+..,•.... sr? •? ? ?.
I 8?w
i 80.1333333 ° W l I I I 11 80.1006000'. W ? l f I 1 ? ? I ? 80.666Q666' W( ? ( I I ! I I '?
Name: KERNERSVILLE Location: 036.0598927°N 080.0880336°W
Date: 11/3/2005 Caption: Landuse Strategies- Caleb's Creek
Scale: 1 inch equals 4000 feet
Caleb's Creek Impac t 1 able (November 21, 2005 )
Map
Impact
ID Purpose
for Impact Stream
length
(ft) Wetland
Area
(ac) Volume
Estimate
(cu.yd.) Impact
Type Proposed
Stream
Mitigation Proposed
Wetland
Mitigation Resource Type
I sewer 71 ___
0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
2 sewer 0 .02 0 cut 0 0 slough WL
3 BMP 515 0 15 fill 515 0 isolated CH
4 recreation 0 0.068 10 fill 0. 0.136 isolated WL
5 recreation 0 0.133 20 fill 0 0.266 isolated WL
6 road 242 0 10 i e 242 0 perennial CH
7 golf 0 0.077 10 fill 0 0.154 forested WL
! 8 sewer 46 0.015 0 cut 0 0 int CH & WL
9 golf 0 0.23 35 fill 0 0.460 forested WL
10 road 286 0.45 80 pipe-fill 286 0.900 per CH & WL
11 golf 0 0.132 20 fi11 0 0.264 forested WL
12 golf 1193 0 35 pipe 1193 0 intermittent CH
13 dam 0 0.081 10 fill 0 0.162 forested WL
14 road 336 0 65 pipe 336 0 perennial CH
15 pool 100 0 0 dredge 0 0 perennial CH
16 restoration 593 0 0 restore 0 0 perennial CH
17 road 144 0 40 pipe 144 0 erennial CH
18 drives 142 0 20 pipe 142 0 perennial CH
19 road 152 0 40 pipe 152 0 perennial CH
20 sewer 57 0 0 cut 0 0 intermittent CH
21 road 360 0 10 pipe 0 0 intermittent CH
22 road 33 0 1 pipe 0 0 intermittent CH
i 23 road 440 0.133 130 pipe 440 0266 per CH & WL
I 24 dam - 0 0.257 400 fill 0 0 open water
25 road 0 1.14 1000 fill 0 0 open water
26 road 771 0.177 155 pipe-fill 771 0.354 forested WL
27 and 0 0.33 0 dredge 0 0.66 marsh
28 golf 0 0.099 15 fill 0 0.198 see
29 school 0 0.768 1000 pipe-fill 0 0 open water
30 school 733 0 155 pipe fill 733 0 perennial CH
31 road 350 0 15 pipe 0 0 intermittent CH
132 road 148 0 40 pipe 148 0 perennial CH
33 and 0 0.649 0 dredge 0 1.298 forested WL
34 lots 0 0.823 550 fill 0 1.646 forested WL
35 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
36 sewer 22 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
37 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
38 sewer 22 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
39 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
140 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
41 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
42 sewer 0 0.007 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
43 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
44 sewer 21 0 0 cut 0 0 perennial CH
45 lots 0 0.108 20 fill 0 0.216 forested WL
46 lots 0 0.060 15 fill 0 0.12 forested WL
Im acts 6903 5.757 3916 5102 7.1 Mitigation

t•
F
I I 'A
i
i.yl
8 !
5
i

'C" PrEptem-s"
ext ; rating Ac?
Pi t
:yc..a 9;758,x.
Area I-
Stream Impact-71 ff
Area 2
Wetland impact-.02 ac
Scale 1:100 (north
-?
i --
/ ,.,..•--''=?- ...,,.'rte ,.
x 1
x
AREA AID #
Caleb creek Pmperues uc
342 N em Sb aet Ste. 6
? C,rewsbo% NC 27401
_ - %
Sheet-of

n -rte n ,„.a..r i`'�*
„a y� g p��'a p� fir
4.06Q am BYO!ap V 5 PY
1
`§ �^ � ,rk �tzd w
00 (north
d' 7 fir f� ,
' �t("d",w°�'",� "
44
17 §47"�,I"
--
�"+""'a^AwPs'&kJti'`."
i
�C✓ ° jf, �/ f fi aid,„ ��1 �j 1 pys3 s
s a;{'.
°,
".++»" � d � :� c'"'w � � 1 �°<" � a�:""�»9� ^�' �* .. / c , ''`�., °� . ,�.a.s.,� �% �� `'�,�,,, ,R t�-A^.** r"<i ^� �+'4z_v.,..s,.�.•` fi u�.
Y
fir°
�i r
mb� 3 °;,%" yy "a�"q'�/ \ k i M ! / - „r� `."A ° \ 4 fl ," 'eM✓A �`
It-
nvj
tt MOO
f
� d
n
5
,
�. ° :»„«� ,sa d •,;a� �& „'""w” °a a, ."gyp" t �'"��.,,�w w xi "� N ,� ^� »��
T'i'`7
P k
a
s g
µa,s
u+
a
Y UA,
" ad ;a' { a^ Oil
"8 VV
1
6
IY ''wt" 7 aid ^N r• S`"P�"S �+�,�;° a�'
fw"J,
AID#
'Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Std 6
. }
j
NC 27401
1

\ \ Area 4
Area 5
Weland 9mpsci-.133 ac
Area 36
Stream ?mpact- 22 If
Scale 1: 100 (n® -?)
- - Area 6
- f - -? Stream 6mapd- 242 ff
Area 37
-- ?- Stream Impact- 21 N
Scale i:100 (north
_ r
l
-- -? - AID #
Caleb Creek Propedw LLC
? 342 N Eim Street Sba 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
Sheet of
Area 7
?, \`• ') WeVand Imspct-.077 ac
Area 38
Stream Impact- 22 If
Scale I: i Go (nom
_ o -
-Z?= Caleb P
AID#
Crook Pmpedes LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Grewsd*m, NC 27401
Saes
,?
141,
Area 8
JO I 5D aC
/ ry
Stream impact- 46 If
-- ; _ Arse 42
Wafiand ?m act- 0007
Sc sds 1 a 100 (north
v
42
-IN
AID #
Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
1
-- -?-- .--- sneer of _.,_
Area 9
Wegand Imapet- .23 sc
Scale 1:100 (north
.
a - a
/-
-ON
7-7
. AID #
Caleb Creek Properties LLC
r! 342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greemboro, NC 27401
i .- ---- -- Sheet of
Area 1
Stream ?mpacts- 286 If
\\\ S
cale 1: 100 north I
?--
VII '
AID#
Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. B
r / Greensboro, NC 27401
Sheet of
{
Area I I
Scdo IA DO (nonh
1
I
v
I
j I AID #
j t Caleb Creek Ropertles u.C
?`-- 342 N EIm Street Ste. 6
Gmensbom, NC 27401
Sheet of ""'
Area 12
Steam ?Mpa° I 1 93 If
Area 39
Stream ?m Cam 21 If
ti
Scale 1: IGO (north
f_
- J
l AID #
Caleb CM* Properties u.C
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
\ \ \ i 1 Sheet of
Area 13
WsUand ?mtpscts°
.068 sc
Sc ds X10 100 (north
AID #
Caleb Cheek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, NC 27401_-
. t ?
Area 14
Stream lmpact- 336 9
Scale 1:100 (north
i
77
fit
g r
a. /
AID#
?w- - r J 11 1 r- _ Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. B
Greensboro, NC 27401
./
Sheel: of
Area 15-100 ft plung pool
Area IS- Stream
-? Restoration- 593 If
r (. Area 17m Box Culvert-144Bf
\ { '? ` ( (f ' Scale 1:100 (north -??
r
` r
1
AID #
.
-;
Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6 Greensboro, NC 1
7 - Sheet of

Area IS
Stream ompact-W N
Area 19
Stream ?mspct-1 52 0f
Sca?®1:1®® (north -+
?\ ?
Ile
/ J AID #
'I I 1 , . 1 / /?
YN ( Caleb Creek Pmperdes LLC
/ -? 342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
ire, NC 27401
Area 20
Stream lmpact 57 N
Scale 1:100 (nor -??
? j;i
'Ap
/.
71
.J
AID #
Caleb Creek PWerfies LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. S
_- f
Greensboro, NC 27401
heat of?
Area 21
?- / - Stream impact- 360 ff
Area 22
Stream ?ma- 33 If
Scais i:100 (north
-
-144
I
AID #
Caleb Creek Properties t.Lc
342 N Sm Street Sta. 6
-? J' ` •- , ?" Greensboro, PVC 27401
Area 23
Stream Impact- 440 If
Area 24
Open Water HH-.257 ac
Scale i:100 (north AID #
Caleb Cn3ek PPmperues u.c
342 N Eft Street Ste. 6
Greensboro NC 27401
v _ -- /? _ - -- S of _
_ ? H heat j
-- Area 25
\ ?. -- M - Open Water PH-1.14 ac
Area 26
_ -•. Stream 6mapct- 771 K
Wetland ?mapct- .17 7 ac
Scale 1:100 (north
III'
US
AID #
I r=te--- ?? r -- ! r-.. Caleb Creek Properties LLC
I
342 N Elm Street Ste. B
Greensboro, NC 27401
1 =I 1 ' !' _ - \ Sheet of _
IX 'ell I--
Area 27
?, - Dredging ®e33 ac
Area 28
Waga d ?mapct- 4099 ac
Sca?e iA CC (north
J j
28
r
AID #
,--r
Caleb Creek Properties LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
?_ __! Jr? ? \ \ f' ''? Greensboro, NC 27401
, -! . ? _ .-.-• : ?. ?. '- ?. ? i ?--- - '?- ? / ? . Sheet-of
r-
.
-
�xtt"y`"'wvM,. i+�"a*w`'^P'x'+w`">vrV .': \\ �'R"6'�+• weNc
'1,Y .:
gyp'.,'�
Mpy�A
"
INN
1,10 furl
n'300
MIT

Area 31
stream ? acts- 35 W
Scds I -IGO (north
N4k
1 __.. f,
31
14
/ \ l
4
AID #
Caleb Creek Properties L LC
342 N Eim Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
heat of _
Area 32
/ Stream ?m acts-148 ff
Scads i oIGO (north
IMII?
/
-c / --

?? AID #
Caleb Creek Properdes LLC
342 N Elm SbW Ste. 6
f r ?, j _ Greensboro. NC 27401
Shoet-of
T _-
? A ?
Area 330
Total Pond Area- 1.55 ac
Wetand Dredging-.649
Scat- 9 : 100 (nor -?
kif I
vill:l
`-
`?
AJD#
Caleb Creek Properdes LLC
342 N Elm Street Ste. 6
Greensboro, NC 27401
err •? ? __._ ___
Area 34
?--. _ ?? ?? ____? ._. .? - ,....?..._? ___. Wetiand 8mpact- .323 ac
Area 35
..._ ._'??, Stream lmpact- 21 If
-- -- , Scale 9 : 1 00 (north -?
w
,-- x
x )x 7 x
x x; L
x x
Area 4®
Stream flmpa ® 21 Iff
X41
Sim impact- 21 ff
--?
Scale I : I GO (north
Jill
-?
i
=??? fC
1}? x
AJD #
Caleb Creek Properties L LC
342 N Ekn Steet Ste. 6
C,reettsbm, NC 27401
Sheet of
Area 43
Sim Impact- 21 if
Area 44
Sim Imapet 2`? ?
Scale 1:100 north
-
L
71
AID #
,\ • = ?-
/ / ` __--- 334 Caleb Crook ProperUes C Elm Street ft. 6
. % / &OengW6, NC 27401
I
. ?_. ! .u: sneet??_
1-
Area 45
Wetand 9mpact-.108 ac
Area 46
Wegand 0mpa 080 ac
/ Scale 9:100 (north -?
_ x
x
y
,, f / -- ---- / AID
csleb osek Properties uc
f f % 342 N Hm Street She. 6
.?. / r
Greensboro, NC 27401
E"VW$Nwld
k

'k
M1
troam Rsator a?bn
Iflustragan
ppoK Scdo l1.0 300
/J IExleft VYWw
a `
SOILS
page 2 DF 1
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Wehadkee Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): (,We) Typic Fluvagucnts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ? No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Muns ell Moist) Abundance!Contrast Structure, etc.
0r1 A IOYR 6!1 ! clay loam
1-12 B 7.5YR 6/6 / loam

/

Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
• Histic Epipedon 0 High Organic Content In Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
• Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
• Aquic Moisture Regime 0 Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
p Reducing Conditions 0 Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors O Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No D
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes C] No ED
Hydric Soils Present? Yes [D No ?
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes ? No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 CUE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project I Site: Caleb's Creek Date: July 05, 2005
Applicant I Owner: Landuse Strategies County: Fors-1h
Investigator; Huvsman State: North Carolina
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes ® No[] Community ID:Bottom of
is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes ? No 21 toff; slot
is the area a potential problem area? Yes ? No ® Transect ID:
(explain on reverse if needed) Plot ID:DF2
VEGETATION
Don-dnant Plant Species Indicator Strati Dominant Plant Species Indicator Stratum
1. Impatiens capensis FACW herb 9.
2. Eulatia viminea FAC+ herb 10.
3. Sagittaria latifolia OBL herb 11.
4. Fraxinus pennsylvanica FACW tree 12.
5. Liquidambar styraciflua FAC+ tree 13.
6. 14.
r. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL., FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 1001/o
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
? Other Q Inundated
Q Saturated in Upper 12"
® No Recorded Data Available 0 Water Marks
0 Drift Lines
Field Observations: 0 Sediment Deposits
Cl Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: ALA -01:1.) Secondary Indicators:
Depth to Free Water in Pit: ' nta in.) ® Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Cl Water-Stained Leaves
? Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 914 -010 0 FAC-Neutral Test
O Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
page 2DF2
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Chewacla Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): (Ch) Fiuvaquentic Dystrochrepts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ? No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munseli Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0_6 A 5YR 5/4 / On loam
6-12 B 7.5YR 4/2 / clay loam

Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon 0 High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
® Suifidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime 0 Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
p Reducing Conditions p Listed on National Hydric Soils List
® Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors 0 Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ?
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes ® No ?
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes ® No ?
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project 1 Site: Caleb's Creek Date: July 05, 2005
Applicant / Owner: Land Use Strategics County: PorWh
Investigator Huysman State: North Carolina
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes N No ? Community ID:bottom of
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes ? No ® tow slope
is the area a potential problem area? Yes ? No ® Transect ID:
(explain on reverse if needed) Plot ID:Data Form 3
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Indicato Stratum Dominant Plant Species Indicator Stratum
1. Eulalia viminea FAC+ herb 9.
2. Impatiens capenis FACW herb 10.
3. Ulmus rubra FAC tree 11.
4. Liquidambar styraciflua FAC+ tree 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
? Other ? Inundated
? Saturated in Upper 12"
® No Recorded Data Available ? Water Marks
® Drift Lines
Field Observations: ® Sediment Deposits
? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: n/a (in.) Secondary Indicators:
Depth to Free Water in Pit: n/a in.) 0 Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
? Water-Stained Leaves
? Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: n/a (in.) ? FAC-Neutral Test
? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Relic oxidation (root channels)
SOILS
page 2 DF 3
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Wehadkee Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): (We) Typic Fluvaauents Confirm Mapped Type? Yes El No 21
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell MoWl (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
0-4 IOYR 6/3 1 clay loam
4-12 5YR 7/8 / sand
f
f
1

Hydric Soil Indicators:
p Histosol 0 Concretions
• Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Q Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
• Reducing Conditions 0 Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No ?
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes [] No
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes ? No
Remarks:
Page 1
Calebs_creek_Neighbors_Alpha(1).xls
Name Tax Pin Address
2011
6873
85 521 Farm Creek Road
1 Adkins, Charles H -
- Kernersville NC 27284

6462
6873
86 7485 Watkins Ford Road
2 Allen, Judith H -
- Kernersville, NC 27284 , ':-
r L

3
Allen, Timothy M
6874-87-7786 1600 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284 .`
1349 South Park Dr.
4 Arbor Development Corp 6874-95-9248 ill
NC 27284
K
ernersv
e,

5
Blackburn, Christopher Trustee
687447-1077 1245 Glenview Drive

NC 27284
Kernersville
1 r " f?
`
,

6 James S
Blackburn 6873-88-1032 7471 Watkins Ford Road t i
, Kernersville, NC 27284 . z r
l
C 7839
6873-86 7491 Watkins Ford Road
7 ythe, Joe
B - Kernersville, NC 27284

8
Bodenhamer, Norris Tuttle
6873-85-2642 7460 Watkins Ford Road
Kernersville, NC 27284 ,
r > 1
f r f?Yy _??>

9
Bowen, Fred J
6874-87-7357 1606 Teague Lane

ill
NC 27284
K
i
ernersv
e, -?_
10 Boyles, Robert H 6874-26-9337
1589 Union Cross Road
NC 27284
ill
K
'` x r
Y
ernersv
e, r

11

Burton, Richard Leon

6874-88-9514 1546 Teague Lane

Kernersville, NC 27284
<?. f

12
Campbell, Curtis W
6873-69-1501 4519 Kernersville Road

Kernersville, NC 27284 t"
.E

13

Chamelin, Billy Lawrence

6873-57-5501 1604 Teague Lane

NC 27284
Kernersville
?+

a
, .:..
14 Chamelin, Charles Eugene 6873-67-2648 1944 Teague Lane
lKernersville, NC 27284
Page 2
Calebs creek_Neighbors Alpha(1).xls
15 Chamelin, Coy Smith
y 6873-68-4510 1920 Teague Lane
NC 27284
Kernersville
, - --------------

16
Chamelin
Jerald
6873-68-5108 1930 Teague Lane
, Kernersville, NC 27284 i
17 Chamelin, Michael Ray 6873-67-5901 1936 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284
18 Chamelin, Bobby L
y 6874-72-1975 1740 Teague Lane
6874-73-2170 Kernersville, NC 27284
-
19 Elliott
Barbara S 6874-76-9669 1670 Pone Tree Drive €
, Kernersville, NC 27284
20 Friesen, Leo R 6874-97-7693 108 Havenstraat Street
Kernersville, NC 27284

21 Fulk, Hines E Jr. 6874-97-5674 106 Havenstraat Street

NC 27284
Kernersville
1
, _.______.__ ____.__.__
22 Garcia
Jose J 6874-89-6419 1525 Teague Lane
j 1
, Kernersville, NC 27284

23 George
Gary 6874-57-6980 5975 Hedgecock Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284

24
Gibbons
Donald G
6873-86-4310 7475 Watkins Ford Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284 ^ J __I

25
Grogan, Eugene Stuart
6874-97-3686
104 Havenstraat Street `
Kernersville, NC 27284
-?
26 Hart, Sandra L 6874-71-2665 1815 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284
27 Haynes, Jerry D 6874-88-9879 1530 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284
27 Fay H
Hedgecock 6874-60-3700 5966 Hedgecock Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284
29 Hedgecock, Ivey Clay 6874-51-5940 5925 Hedgecock Road
I Kernersville, NC 27284
Page 3
Calebs creek_Neighbors Alpha(1).xls

30 Hedgecock, Penny Smith
6874-75-2732 1676 Pine Tree Drive
ll
NC 272
4

I
Trustee Kernersvi
e,
8 ?
3t Hedgecock, Ralph E 6874-41-8966 5961 Hedgecock Road
687451-2865 Kernersville, NC 27284
32 Hedgecock
Ralph Edwards Jr. 6874-51-8869 5979 Hedgecock Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284
33 Hedgecock
Richard T 6874-87-7201 1358 Rock Barn Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284

_
__--_.--------
34 Jackson, Ophelia 6874-36-8008 1182 Glenview Drive
Kernersville, NC 27284

35 Bill D
Katsis 6873-99-0980 7493 Watkins Ford Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284

5930 Loradale Drive
36 Lane, Addie Lillian 6874-43-5792 Kernersville, NC 27284
i
37 Lane, Frankie Ray 6874-43-1819 5911 Loradale Drive
Kernersville, NC 27284
38 Lane
John W 6874-61-1868 5983 Hedgecock Road
, Kernersville, NC 27284

39
Lane, Roy Anthony 5901 Loradale
Drive
Kernersville, NC 27284
40 Lauten, N Delbert Jr. 6873-66-5510 1972 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284 d

41
Noah D
Lauten
6873-66-4311 7365 Watkins Ford Road
, Kernersvilte, NC 27284 s
42 Lauten, Shirley Mae 6873-66-7179 7405 Watkins Ford Road
Kernersville, NC 27284
43 Lewis
Thomas R 6874-89-7069 Po Box 816
(
, Kernersvilte, NC 27285 !
44 LGS INC 687487-8926 101 Charlois Blvd.
Winston Salem, NC 37103
Page 4
Calebs creek_Neighbors_Alpha(1).xis
45 David P
Matthews 6873-69-4332 1910 Teague Lane
, Kernersville, NC 27284

46
Velma
Matthews
6873-67-2110
Route 1 Box 202 j s

i
, East Bend, NC 27018

47
McEntire
Kay S
6874-46-8468 1250 Glenview Drive
I
, Kernersville, NC 272$4

i
U

6874
51
4819

5937 Hedgecock Road ___.__..._ _..___ _.___. .__.__.._ _._..., ...__...._?___......
i
4$ McNamara, Arch
e -
- Kernersville, NC 27284
49 Nichols, Duanna A 6874-88-8150 1580 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284
50 Parrish, G Norman 6874-$7-6042 1620 Teague Lane

Kernersville, NC 27284
! ?

51 Cecil Jr.
Pearman 6874-72-1705 1750 Teague Lane
, Kernersville, NC 27284
52 PM Development LLC PO Box 5323
Winston Salem, NC 27113 €

53
Reel, Goldis S
6874-97-1637 102 Havenstraat Street

Kernersville, NC 27284 { &
! i
54 Reid, Gary David 6873-69-4155 1900 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284 j

-
55 Sanders, John W Jr. 6884-07-0610 110 Havenstraat Street
Kernersville, NC 27284 ;

56 Sapp, R Scott 6874-88-9686 1540 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284
57 Schoolfield, Robert M 6874-60-5241 1850 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284
L
ne
1860 T
58 Hobert
Scott 6873-69-5242 eague
a
, Kernersville, NC 272$4
1
???-?--
59 Scott, Tony 6874-60-5055 1856 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284 4

Page 5
Calebs creek_Neighbors Alpha(1).xis
60 Secretary of Veterans Affairs 6874-89-9099 251 Main Street N
Winston Salem, NC 27155 I

61 Linda S
Shultz 6874-27-7448 1136 Glenview Drive
, Kernersville, NC 27284
62 Smith
James F 6873-85-4818 7472 Watkins Ford Road p
, Kernersville, NC 27284 !

63 Smith
Luther H Jr. 6884-07-6532 112 Havenstraat Street {
, 6884-07-1598 Kernersville, NC 27284
64 Smith, Mary G 6874-34-3527 5875 Loradale Drive
6874-32-4606 Kernersville, NC 27284
65 Shannon
Stubbs 6874-27-9628
1349 Amyl-ee Trail
, Kernersville, NC 27284
66 Taylor, Bernard H 6874-88-8284
1560 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284

l

67 Tucker, Carol 1 4345 High Point Road
Kernersville, NC 27284

68
VanHorn
John E
6874-88-7871 1544 Teague Lane
, Kernersville, NC 27284
69 Weavil, J Howard 6873-74-6870 4685 High Point Road
Kernersville, NC 27284

70
Whicker, Leo O Jr.
6874-93-5699 841 Silver Dapple Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284
_
71 Willard, Joseph W Trustee 6874-72-0563 1754 Teague Lane
Kernersville, NC 27284

72
Williams
Robert E
6874-88-8490 1550 Teague Lane
, Kernersville, NC 27284

73
Williams
Winnie Pauline
6874-72-0431
1760 Teague Lane €
, Kernersville, NC 27284
74 W S Forsyth County Board of 685 70-9172 PO Box 2513
l
NC 27102
Education Winston Sa
em,
Vf
I-